From: Joel Granados <j.granados@samsung.com>

Move IOMMU_IOPF from under INTEL_IOMMU_SVM into INTEL_IOMMU. This
certifies that the core intel iommu utilizes the IOPF library
functions, independent of the INTEL_IOMMU_SVM config.

Signed-off-by: Joel Granados <j.granados@samsung.com>
---
 drivers/iommu/intel/Kconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/Kconfig b/drivers/iommu/intel/Kconfig
index f52fb39c968e..2888671c9278 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/intel/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/Kconfig
@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ config INTEL_IOMMU
 	select DMA_OPS
 	select IOMMU_API
 	select IOMMU_IOVA
+	select IOMMU_IOPF
 	select IOMMUFD_DRIVER if IOMMUFD
 	select NEED_DMA_MAP_STATE
 	select DMAR_TABLE
@@ -51,7 +52,6 @@ config INTEL_IOMMU_SVM
 	depends on X86_64
 	select MMU_NOTIFIER
 	select IOMMU_SVA
-	select IOMMU_IOPF
 	help
 	  Shared Virtual Memory (SVM) provides a facility for devices
 	  to access DMA resources through process address space by

-- 
2.43.0

On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 03:17:14PM +0200, Joel Granados via B4 Relay wrote:
> @@ -51,7 +52,6 @@ config INTEL_IOMMU_SVM
>  	depends on X86_64
>  	select MMU_NOTIFIER
>  	select IOMMU_SVA
> -	select IOMMU_IOPF

Does patch 1 still compile if INTEL_IOMMU_SVM=n?

Jason

On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 09:20:19AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 03:17:14PM +0200, Joel Granados via B4 Relay wrote:
> > @@ -51,7 +52,6 @@ config INTEL_IOMMU_SVM
> >  	depends on X86_64
> >  	select MMU_NOTIFIER
> >  	select IOMMU_SVA
> > -	select IOMMU_IOPF
> 
> Does patch 1 still compile if INTEL_IOMMU_SVM=n?
It does for me. With and without INTEL_IOMMU_SVM. Is there a config that
is not compiling for you? You can send that you to me and I can give it
a try, to see if I get the same issue.

Best

-- 

Joel Granados

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 09:40:59AM +0200, Joel Granados wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 09:20:19AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 03:17:14PM +0200, Joel Granados via B4 Relay wrote:
> > > @@ -51,7 +52,6 @@ config INTEL_IOMMU_SVM
> > >  	depends on X86_64
> > >  	select MMU_NOTIFIER
> > >  	select IOMMU_SVA
> > > -	select IOMMU_IOPF
> > 
> > Does patch 1 still compile if INTEL_IOMMU_SVM=n?
> It does for me. With and without INTEL_IOMMU_SVM. Is there a config that
> is not compiling for you? You can send that you to me and I can give it
> a try, to see if I get the same issue.

Okay, it compiles, but it is broken right? This hunk just can't be
correct, SVM needs IOPF to work

Jason

On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 10:37:34AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 09:40:59AM +0200, Joel Granados wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 09:20:19AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 03:17:14PM +0200, Joel Granados via B4 Relay wrote:
> > > > @@ -51,7 +52,6 @@ config INTEL_IOMMU_SVM
> > > >  	depends on X86_64
> > > >  	select MMU_NOTIFIER
> > > >  	select IOMMU_SVA
> > > > -	select IOMMU_IOPF
> > > 

Will answer this based on https://lore.kernel.org/20240913-jag-iopfv8-v2-0-dea01c2343bc@samsung.com
as there are small differences with the current version of this patch.

> > > Does patch 1 still compile if INTEL_IOMMU_SVM=n?
> > It does for me. With and without INTEL_IOMMU_SVM. Is there a config that
> > is not compiling for you? You can send that you to me and I can give it
> > a try, to see if I get the same issue.
> 
> Okay, it compiles, but it is broken right? This hunk just can't be
> correct, SVM needs IOPF to work

AFAIK Yes: SVM *does* need IOPF to work. But IOMMU_IOPF *will* be
selected if INTEL_IOMMU_SVM is selected because INTEL_IOMMU_SVM is
covered by the `if INTEL_IOMMU` condition. Its the same way that the
relation between INTEL_IOMMU_SVM and PCI_PASID is handled: PCI_PASID
will be set if INTEL_IOMMU_SVM is set.

Please let me know if I'm misreading or have missed something.

Best

-- 

Joel Granados