On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 03:29:27PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:

On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 09:10:16AM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:

quoted

+int arm_smmu_attach_prepare_vmaster(struct arm_smmu_attach_state *state,
+				    struct iommu_domain *domain)
+{
+	struct arm_smmu_nested_domain *nested_domain;
+	struct arm_smmu_vmaster *vmaster;
+	unsigned long vsid;
+	unsigned int cfg;
+
+	iommu_group_mutex_assert(state->master->dev);
+
+	if (domain->type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_NESTED)
+		return 0;
+	nested_domain = to_smmu_nested_domain(domain);
+
+	/* Skip ABORT/BYPASS or invalid vSTE */
+	cfg = FIELD_GET(STRTAB_STE_0_CFG, le64_to_cpu(nested_domain->ste[0]));
+	if (cfg == STRTAB_STE_0_CFG_ABORT || cfg == STRTAB_STE_0_CFG_BYPASS)
+		return 0;

Why? If the VM sets an ABORT vSTE then I would expect that any
protection violation events the VM triggers are captured and forwarded
as well?

Basically any time a vSTE is in place we should capture events that
are affiliated with the SID?

I see. I will drop this.
 

quoted

+	if (!(nested_domain->ste[0] & cpu_to_le64(STRTAB_STE_0_V)))
+		return 0;
+
+	vsid = iommufd_viommu_get_vdev_id(&nested_domain->vsmmu->core,
+					  state->master->dev);
+	/* Fail the attach if vSID is not correct set by the user space */
+	if (!vsid)
+		return -ENOENT;

Is it really OK that 0 is being used as invalid here?

Hmm, perhaps better to do an int function for -ENOENT. Will fix
this.

Thanks
Nicolin