Hi Christoph,
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:44:59 +0100, Christoph Hellwig <h...@infradead.org>
wrote:
> > *
> > * Returns 0 on success and < 0 on error.
> > @@ -28,6 +28,9 @@ int iommu_sva_alloc_pasid(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > ioasid_t min, ioasid_t max) int ret = 0;
> > ioasid_t pasid;
> >
> > + if (mm != current->mm)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
>
> Why not remove the parameter entirely?
It was removed in my v1 but thought it would be cleaner if we treat
iommu_sva_alloc_pasid() as a leaf function of iommu_sva_bind_device(). Then
we don't have to do get_task_mm() every time. But to your point below, it
is better to get low-level driver handle it.
>
> > @@ -2989,8 +2990,11 @@ iommu_sva_bind_device(struct device *dev, struct
> > mm_struct *mm, unsigned int fla return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
> >
> > /* Supervisor SVA does not need the current mm */
> > - if ((flags & IOMMU_SVA_BIND_SUPERVISOR) && mm)
> > - return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > + if (!(flags & IOMMU_SVA_BIND_SUPERVISOR)) {
> > + mm = get_task_mm(current);
> > + if (!mm)
> > + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > + }
>
> I don't see why we need the reference. I think we should just stop
> passing the mm to ->sva_bind and let the low-level driver deal with
> any reference to current->mm where needed.
The mm users reference is just for precaution, in case low level driver use
kthread etc.
I agree it is cleaner to just remove mm here, let the low-level driver deal
with it.
Let me give it a spin.
Thanks,
Jacob
