[PATCH v3 07/17] dma-mapping: Implement link/unlink ranges API

[Leon Romanovsky]

On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 09:05:08AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 08:55:33PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 02:59:30PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Sun, Nov 10, 2024 at 03:46:54PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > +static void __iommu_dma_iova_unlink(struct device *dev,
> > > > +		struct dma_iova_state *state, size_t offset, size_t size,
> > > > +		enum dma_data_direction dir, unsigned long attrs,
> > > > +		bool free_iova)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct iommu_domain *domain = iommu_get_dma_domain(dev);
> > > > +	struct iommu_dma_cookie *cookie = domain->iova_cookie;
> > > > +	struct iova_domain *iovad = &cookie->iovad;
> > > > +	dma_addr_t addr = state->addr + offset;
> > > > +	size_t iova_start_pad = iova_offset(iovad, addr);
> > > > +	struct iommu_iotlb_gather iotlb_gather;
> > > > +	size_t unmapped;
> > > > +
> > > > +	if ((state->__size & DMA_IOVA_USE_SWIOTLB) ||
> > > > +	    (!dev_is_dma_coherent(dev) && !(attrs & DMA_ATTR_SKIP_CPU_SYNC)))
> > > > +		iommu_dma_iova_unlink_range_slow(dev, addr, size, dir, attrs);
> > > > +
> > > > +	iommu_iotlb_gather_init(&iotlb_gather);
> > > > +	iotlb_gather.queued = free_iova && READ_ONCE(cookie->fq_domain);
> > > > +
> > > > +	size = iova_align(iovad, size + iova_start_pad);
> > > > +	addr -= iova_start_pad;
> > > > +	unmapped = iommu_unmap_fast(domain, addr, size, &iotlb_gather);
> > > > +	WARN_ON(unmapped != size);
> > > 
> > > Does the new API require that the 'size' passed to dma_iova_unlink()
> > > exactly match the 'size' passed to the corresponding call to
> > > dma_iova_link()? I ask because the IOMMU page-table code is built around
> > > the assumption that partial unmap() operations never occur (i.e.
> > > operations which could require splitting a huge mapping). We just
> > > removed [1] that code from the Arm IO page-table implementations, so it
> > > would be good to avoid adding it back for this.
> > 
> > dma_iova_link/dma_iova_unlink() don't have any assumptions in addition
> > to already existing for dma_map_sg/dma_unmap_sg(). In reality, it means
> > that all calls to unlink will have same size as for link.
> 
> Ok, great. Any chance you could call that out in the documentation patch,
> please?

Can you suggest what should I add there, as it is not specific to new
API, but general note applicable to all __iommu_unmap() callers?

Thanks