On 09/11/2023 12:57, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 12:17:35PM +0000, Joao Martins wrote: >> On 08/11/2023 12:48, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 07:16:52AM +0000, Duan, Zhenzhong wrote: >>> >>>>>> + ret = iommufd_backend_alloc_hwpt(iommufd, vbasedev->devid, >>>>>> + container->ioas_id, &hwpt_id); >>>>>> + >>>>>> + if (ret) { >>>>>> + error_setg_errno(errp, errno, "error alloc shadow hwpt"); >>>>>> + return ret; >>>>>> + } >>>>> >>>>> The above alloc_hwpt fails for mdevs (at least, it fails for me >>>>> attempting to use >>>>> iommufd backend with vfio-ccw and vfio-ap on s390). The ioctl is failing >>>>> in the >>>>> kernel because it can't find an IOMMUFD_OBJ_DEVICE. >>>>> >>>>> AFAIU that's because the mdevs are meant to instead use kernel access via >>>>> vfio_iommufd_emulated_attach_ioas, not hwpt. That's how mdevs behave when >>>>> looking at the kernel vfio compat container. >>>>> >>>>> As a test, I was able to get vfio-ccw and vfio-ap working using the >>>>> iommufd >>>>> backend by just skipping this alloc_hwpt above and instead passing >>>>> container- >>>>>> ioas_id into the iommufd_cdev_attach_hwpt below. That triggers the >>>>> vfio_iommufd_emulated_attach_ioas call in the kernel. >>>> >>>> Thanks for help test and investigation. >>>> I was only focusing on real device and missed the mdev particularity, >>>> sorry. >>>> You are right, there is no hwpt support for mdev, not even an emulated >>>> hwpt. >>>> I'll digging into this and see how to distinguish mdev with real device in >>>> this low level function. >>> >>> I was expecting that hwpt manipulation would be done exclusively >>> inside the device-specific vIOMMU userspace driver. Generic code paths >>> that don't have that knowledge should use the IOAS for everything >> >> I am probably late into noticing this given Zhenzhong v5; but arent' we >> forgetting the enforcing of dirty tracking in HWPT is done /via/ >> ALLOC_HWPT ? > > The underlying viommu driver supporting mdev cannot support dirty > tracking via the hwpt flag, so it doesn't matter. > > The entire point is that a mdev doesn't have a hwpt or any of the hwpt > linked features including dirty tracking.
I am not talking about mdevs; but rather the regular (non mdev) case not being able to use dirty tracking with autodomains hwpt allocation. Joao