Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] iommufd: Add iommufd_object_tombstone_user() helper

From: Xu Yilun
Date: Wed Jun 25 2025 - 03:33:39 EST


On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 10:35:20AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 05:49:43PM +0800, Xu Yilun wrote:
> > @@ -251,16 +252,30 @@ static int iommufd_fops_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> > */
> > while (!xa_empty(&ictx->objects)) {
> > unsigned int destroyed = 0;
> > - unsigned long index;
> >
> > - xa_for_each(&ictx->objects, index, obj) {
> > - if (!refcount_dec_if_one(&obj->users))
> > - continue;
>
> I don't think you need all these changes..
>
> xa_for_each will skip the XA_ZERO_ENTRIES because it won't return NULL
>
> xa_empty() will fail, but just remove it.
>
> @@ -288,6 +288,7 @@ static int iommufd_fops_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> struct iommufd_sw_msi_map *next;
> struct iommufd_sw_msi_map *cur;
> struct iommufd_object *obj;
> + bool empty;
>
> /*
> * The objects in the xarray form a graph of "users" counts, and we have
> @@ -298,11 +299,13 @@ static int iommufd_fops_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> * until the entire list is destroyed. If this can't progress then there
> * is some bug related to object refcounting.
> */
> - while (!xa_empty(&ictx->objects)) {
> + do {
> unsigned int destroyed = 0;
> unsigned long index;
>
> + empty = true;
> xa_for_each(&ictx->objects, index, obj) {
> + empty = false;
> if (!refcount_dec_if_one(&obj->users))
> continue;
> destroyed++;
> @@ -313,8 +316,13 @@ static int iommufd_fops_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> /* Bug related to users refcount */
> if (WARN_ON(!destroyed))
> break;
> - }
> - WARN_ON(!xa_empty(&ictx->groups));
> + } while (!empty);
> +
> + /*
> + * There may be some tombstones left over from
> + * iommufd_object_tombstone_user()
> + */
> + xa_destroy(&ictx->groups);

I'm good to it. I was obsessed to ensure the xarray super clean.

Thanks,
Yilun

>
>
> Jason