> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 3, 2025 5:05 PM
> To: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>
> Cc: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>; ddutile@redhat.com; Peter
> Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>; Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>;
> Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>; qemu-arm@nongnu.org;
> qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>; Wangzhou
> (B) <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>; jiangkunkun <jiangkunkun@huawei.com>;
> Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>;
> zhangfei.gao@linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] hw/arm/virt: Add support for user-creatable
> nested SMMUv3
> 
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 03:21:57PM +0000, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
> wrote:
> > I am working on the above now and have quick question to you😊.
> >
> > Looking at the smmu_dev_attach_viommu() fn here[0],
> > it appears to do the following:
> >
> > 1. Alloc a s2_hwpt if not allocated already and attach it.
> > 2. Allocate abort and bypass hwpt
> > 3. Attach bypass hwpt.
> >
> > I didn't get why we are doing the step 3 here. To me it looks like,
> > when we attach the s2_hwpt(ie, the nested parent domain attach),
> > the kernel will do,
> >
> > arm_smmu_attach_dev()
> >   arm_smmu_make_s2_domain_ste()
> >
> > It appears through step 3, we achieve the same thing again.
> >
> > Or it is possible I missed something obvious here.
> 
> Because a device cannot attach to a vIOMMU object directly, but
> only via a proxy hwpt_nested. So, this bypass hwpt gives us the
> port to associate the device to the vIOMMU, before a vDEVICE or
> a "translate" hwpt_nested is allocated.
> 
> Currently it's the same because an S2 parent hwpt holds a VMID,
> so we could just attach the device to the S2 hwpt for the same
> STE configuration as attaching the device to the proxy bypass
> hwpt. Yet, this will change in the future after letting vIOMMU
> objects hold their own VMIDs to share a common S2 parent hwpt
> that won't have a VMID, i.e. arm_smmu_make_s2_domain_ste() will
> need the vIOMMU object to get the VMID for STE.
> 
> I should have added a few lines of comments there :)

Ok. Thanks for the explanation. I will keep it then and add few comments
to make it clear.

Do you have an initial implementation of the above with vIOMMU object
holding the VMIDs to share? Actually I do have a dependency on that for
my KVM pinned VMID series[0] where it was suggested that the VMID
should associated with a vIOMMU object rather than the IOMMUFD
context I used in there.

And Jason mentioned about the work involved to do that here[1]. Appreciate
if you could share if any progress is made on that so that I can try to rebase
that KVM  Pinned series on top of that and give it a try.

Thanks,
Shameer
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20240208151837.35068-1-shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com/
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20241129150628.GG1253388@nvidia.com/