Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] iommu/hyperv: Add para-virtualized IOMMU support for Hyper-V guest

Yu Zhang <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.iommu,org.kernel.vger.linux-arch,org.kernel.vger.linux-hyperv,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-pci
Message-ID <aiioa6ospojivued3djhwadyfpit5temyvrgm3xxzhzt6aqbiv@hqz6q5bqnl6w>
On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 12:01:13AM +0800, Yu Zhang wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 09:22:16AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 05:37:48PM +0800, Yu Zhang wrote:
> > > > Why check it at all? Is there an issue with attaching the same thing
> > > > twice? Will it blip the DMA or something?
> > > 
> > > Actually, I do not think there should be any issue with attaching twice.
> > > Hyper-V *should* be able to accept such attachment. But I do not want to
> > > make such assumption just for a redundant hypercall.
> > > 
> > > Does this reasoning make sense, or would you prefer that I remove the
> > > check?
> > 
> > I would probably drop it. Having blocking always set blocking to the
> > HW regardless of what the SW tracking state says feels more robust to
> > me.
> > 
> 
> Got it. Will drop the check and make sure each blocking request
> reasserts the blocking state in Hyper-V at HW level.
> 


Sorry, Jason - I replied too quickly. :(

Latest confirmation from Hyper-V team about the existing behavior is
that, a repeated attach of the same device to the same domain returns
HV_STATUS_DEVICE_ALREADY_IN_DOMAIN. This is established behavior, and
other guest OS is already following such contract. 
                                                                                                                                                        
So we could
- either keep the duplicate check in hv_iommu_blocking_attach_dev();
- or add code in our common helper, hv_iommu_attach_dev(), to treat
  HV_STATUS_DEVICE_ALREADY_IN_DOMAIN also as successful explicitly. 

And since normal paging-domain attaches do not have this duplicate
case, I'd prefer the first choice, to keep current check in
hv_iommu_blocking_attach_dev().

@Jacob @Jason Is this choice acceptible for you?
                                                                                                                                                        
B.R.
Yu

> B.R.
> Yu
> 
> > Jason
> > 
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.