Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] iommufd/device: Use iommu_group_replace_domain()

[Nicolin Chen]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 01:38:32AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> > From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 7:00 PM
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 02:11:23AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> >
> > > My confusion is that we have different flows between detach/attach
> > > and replace.
> > >
> > > today with separate detach+attach we have following flow:
> > >
> > >         Remove device from current hwpt;
> > >         if (last_device in hwpt) {
> > >                 Remove hwpt domain from current iopt;
> > >                 if (last_device in group)
> > >                         detach group from hwpt domain;
> > >         }
> > >
> > >         if (first device in group) {
> > >                 attach group to new hwpt domain;
> > >                 if (first_device in hwpt)
> > >                         Add hwpt domain to new iopt;
> > >         Add device to new hwpt;
> > >
> > > but replace flow is different on the detach part:
> > >
> > >         if (first device in group) {
> > >                 replace group's domain from current hwpt to new hwpt;
> > >                 if (first_device in hwpt)
> > >                         Add hwpt domain to new iopt;
> > >         }
> > >
> > >         Remove device from old hwpt;
> > >         if (last_device in old hwpt)
> > >                 Remove hwpt domain from old iopt;
> > >
> > >         Add device to new hwpt;
> > >
> > > I'm yet to figure out whether we have sufficient lock protection to
> > > prevent other paths from using old iopt/hwpt to find the device
> > > which is already attached to a different domain.
> >
> > With Jason's new series, the detach() routine is lighter now.
> >
> > I wonder if it'd be safer now to do the detach() call after
> > iommu_group_replace_domain()?
> >
> 
> yes, looks so.

Will rebase a v3 once Jason updates his series. Thanks!