[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 6/9] iommufd: Reserved -1 in the iommufd xarray

[Liu, Yi L]

> From: Tian, Kevin <kevin.tian at intel.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2023 2:42 PM
> 
> > From: Liu, Yi L <yi.l.liu at intel.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 10:54 PM
> >
> > VFIO needs two reserved values. 0 is already reserved by initializing
> > xarray with XA_FLAGS_ALLOC1. This reserves -1 by limiting the xa alloc
> > range.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c | 5 ++++-
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c
> > b/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c
> > index 3fbe636c3d8a..51b27c96c52f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c
> > @@ -28,6 +28,9 @@ struct iommufd_object_ops {
> >  static const struct iommufd_object_ops iommufd_object_ops[];
> >  static struct miscdevice vfio_misc_dev;
> >
> > +/* -1 is reserved */
> > +#define iommufd_xa_limit_32b XA_LIMIT(0, (-2U))
> > +
> >  struct iommufd_object *_iommufd_object_alloc(struct iommufd_ctx *ictx,
> >  					     size_t size,
> >  					     enum iommufd_object_type type)
> > @@ -50,7 +53,7 @@ struct iommufd_object *_iommufd_object_alloc(struct
> > iommufd_ctx *ictx,
> >  	 * before calling iommufd_object_finalize().
> >  	 */
> >  	rc = xa_alloc(&ictx->objects, &obj->id, XA_ZERO_ENTRY,
> > -		      xa_limit_32b, GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
> > +		      iommufd_xa_limit_32b, GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
> 
> Just direct use XA_LIMIT() here.

Ok.

> btw do we need a contract so vfio can learn 0 and -1 are reserved or
> fine to have a fixed assumption in later patches?

I doubt how to do it. ☹ @Jason? What about your opinion?

Regards,
Yi Liu