mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
To: Samiullah Khawaja <skhawaja@google.com>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	Alex Williamson <alex@shazbot.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	<iommu@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>,
	Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
	"David Matlack" <dmatlack@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>,
	Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/18] iommu: Implement IOMMU Live update FLB callbacks
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2026 16:31:01 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <asWEtTcNJSbrY579@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260921004834.2601285-3-skhawaja@google.com>

On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 12:48:18AM +0000, Samiullah Khawaja wrote:
> +struct iommu_flb_obj {
> +	struct mutex lock;
> +	struct iommu_flb_ser *ser;
> +
> +	struct iommu_hw_array_ser *curr_iommu_array;
> +	struct iommu_domain_array_ser *curr_domain_array;
> +	struct iommu_device_array_ser *curr_device_array;
> +};

IIUIC, there should be one pair of obj + ser in the entire system:
  - old kernel has one outgoing obj + ser
  - new kernel has one incoming obj + ser
right?

If so, things in iommu_flb_obj (except ser) are all transient, and
there is no need to preserve them across the two kernels.

It also feels redundant to have this iommu_flb_obj structure. Why
not link liveupdate_flb_op_args directly to the ser? Then, things
in iommu_flb_obj could be global?

> +static int iommu_liveupdate_flb_preserve(struct liveupdate_flb_op_args *argp)
> +{
> +	struct iommu_flb_obj *obj;
> +	struct iommu_flb_ser *ser;
> +	void *mem;
> +
> +	/* obj exists only in the current kernel to track preserved state */
> +	obj = kzalloc_obj(*obj, GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!obj)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	mutex_init(&obj->lock);
> +
> +	/* mem is allocated via KHO and will survive the kexec */
> +	mem = kho_alloc_preserve(sizeof(*ser));
> +	if (IS_ERR(mem))
> +		goto err_free_obj;
> +
> +	ser = mem;
> +	obj->ser = ser;
> +	ser->version = IOMMU_LUO_FLB_VERSION;

As version is per ser, ...

> +static int iommu_liveupdate_flb_retrieve(struct liveupdate_flb_op_args *argp)
> +{
> +	struct iommu_flb_obj *obj;
> +	struct iommu_flb_ser *ser;
> +
> +	obj = kzalloc_obj(*obj, GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!obj) {
> +		/*
> +		 * If retrieve fails, the finish path won't be called as
> +		 * can_finish() will fail, preventing the restore.
> +		 */
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Data must be present and valid from the previous kernel */
> +	BUG_ON(!kho_restore_folio(argp->data));
> +
> +	mutex_init(&obj->lock);
> +	ser = phys_to_virt(argp->data);
> +	obj->ser = ser;
> +
> +	obj->curr_domain_array = iommu_liveupdate_restore_array(ser->iommu_domain_array_phys);
> +	obj->curr_device_array = iommu_liveupdate_restore_array(ser->device_array_phys);
> +	obj->curr_iommu_array = iommu_liveupdate_restore_array(ser->iommu_array_phys);

... should we validate ser->version before restoring arrays?

> +/**
> + * enum iommu_type_ser - Type of the IOMMU being preserved
> + * @IOMMU_INVALID: Invalid type of IOMMU
> + *
> + * IOMMU type is stored in the IOMMU HW state to differentiate between various
> + * IOMMU HWs.
> + */
> +enum iommu_type_ser {
> +	IOMMU_INVALID,
> +};

Nit: IOMMU_* sounds too generic. Given it's ser-specific, maybe
IOMMU_SER_TYPE_*?

> +/**
> + * struct iommu_domain_ser - Serialized state of an IOMMU domain
> + * @hdr: Common object header
> + * @top_table_phys: Physical address of the top-level page table
> + * @top_level: Level of the top-level page table
> + * @vasz: Virtual Address Size

Since it comes directly from iommupt, why not just reuse:
    @max_vasz_lg2: Maximum number of bits the VA can contain
?

> +/**
> + * struct iommu_dev_map_ser - Serialized mapping between device, domain,
> + *				    and IOMMU instance.
> + * @attachment_id: ID of the attachment between device and domain.
> + * @domain_phys: Physical address of the domain
> + * @iommu_phys: Physical address of the IOMMU
> + */
> +struct iommu_dev_map_ser {
> +	u64 attachment_id;
> +	u64 domain_phys;
> +	u64 iommu_phys;
> +} __packed;

Hmm, why iommu<->domain?

An attachment (software) is between device and domain.

A device is always behind an IOMMU IOMMU HW (fixed; hardware).

Should iommu_phys be moved under iommu_device_ser directly?

> +/**
> + * struct iommu_device_ser - Serialized state of a device
> + * @hdr: Common object header
> + * @devid: Device ID
> + * @pci_domain_nr: PCI domain number
> + * @dma_owner_token: Token to identify the DMA owner of this device
> + * @domain_iommu_ser: Domain and IOMMU mapping
> + */
> +struct iommu_device_ser {
> +	struct iommu_hdr_ser hdr;
> +	u32 devid;
> +	u32 pci_domain_nr;
> +	u64 dma_owner_token;
> +	struct iommu_dev_map_ser domain_iommu_ser;

I guess this single attachment_id needs to be fixed in phase 2 for
PASID?

> +} __packed;
> +
> +/**
> + * struct iommu_hw_ser - Serialized state of an IOMMU instance
> + * @hdr: Common object header
> + * @token: Unique token for the IOMMU

Could be clearer:
@token: Unique token to identify the IOMMU instance

Nicolin

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-06 23:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-21  0:48 [PATCH v5 00/18] iommu: Add live update state preservation Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 01/18] memfd: export memfd_get_seals() Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 02/18] iommu: Implement IOMMU Live update FLB callbacks Samiullah Khawaja
2026-10-06 23:31   ` Nicolin Chen [this message]
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 03/18] iommu/pages: Add APIs to preserve/unpreserve/restore iommu pages Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 04/18] iommupt: Implement preserve/unpreserve/restore callbacks Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 05/18] iommu: Implement IOMMU domain preservation Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 06/18] iommu: Implement device and IOMMU HW preservation Samiullah Khawaja
2026-10-07  3:21   ` Nicolin Chen
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 07/18] iommu/vt-d: Implement device and iommu preserve/unpreserve ops Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 08/18] iommu/vt-d: Clear unpreserved context entries during shutdown Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 09/18] iommu: Add APIs to get iommu and device preserved state Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 10/18] iommu/vt-d: Restore IOMMU state and reclaimed domain ids Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 11/18] iommu: Restore and reattach preserved domains to devices Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 12/18] iommu/vt-d: Handle reattach of the restored domain Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 13/18] iommu/vt-d: Preserve PASID table of preserved device Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 14/18] iommufd: Implement ioctl to mark HWPT for preservation Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 15/18] iommufd: Persist iommu hardware pagetables for live update Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-23 23:59   ` John Starks
2026-09-24 17:49     ` Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 16/18] iommufd: Add APIs to preserve/unpreserve a vfio cdev Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 17/18] vfio/pci: Preserve the iommufd state of the " Samiullah Khawaja
2026-09-21  0:48 ` [PATCH v5 18/18] iommufd/selftest: Add test to verify iommufd preservation Samiullah Khawaja

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=asWEtTcNJSbrY579@nvidia.com \
    --to=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alex@shazbot.org \
    --cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dmatlack@google.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
    --cc=praan@google.com \
    --cc=pratyush@kernel.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=skhawaja@google.com \
    --cc=vipinsh@google.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®