The per domain spinlock is acquired in iommu_flush_dev_iotlb(), which
is possbile to be called in the interrupt context. For example, the
drm-intel's CI system got completely blocked with below error:

 WARNING: inconsistent lock state
 6.0.0-rc1-CI_DRM_11990-g6590d43d39b9+ #1 Not tainted
 --------------------------------
 inconsistent {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} -> {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} usage.
 swapper/6/0 [HC0[0]:SC1[1]:HE1:SE0] takes:
 ffff88810440d678 (&domain->lock){+.?.}-{2:2}, at: iommu_flush_dev_iotlb.part.61+0x23/0x80
 {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at:
   lock_acquire+0xd3/0x310
   _raw_spin_lock+0x2a/0x40
   domain_update_iommu_cap+0x20b/0x2c0
   intel_iommu_attach_device+0x5bd/0x860
   __iommu_attach_device+0x18/0xe0
   bus_iommu_probe+0x1f3/0x2d0
   bus_set_iommu+0x82/0xd0
   intel_iommu_init+0xe45/0x102a
   pci_iommu_init+0x9/0x31
   do_one_initcall+0x53/0x2f0
   kernel_init_freeable+0x18f/0x1e1
   kernel_init+0x11/0x120
   ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
 irq event stamp: 162354
 hardirqs last  enabled at (162354): [<ffffffff81b59274>] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x54/0x70
 hardirqs last disabled at (162353): [<ffffffff81b5901b>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x4b/0x50
 softirqs last  enabled at (162338): [<ffffffff81e00323>] __do_softirq+0x323/0x48e
 softirqs last disabled at (162349): [<ffffffff810c1588>] irq_exit_rcu+0xb8/0xe0
 other info that might help us debug this:
  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
        CPU0
        ----
   lock(&domain->lock);
   <Interrupt>
     lock(&domain->lock);
   *** DEADLOCK ***
 1 lock held by swapper/6/0:

This coverts the spin_lock/unlock() into the irq save/restore varieties
to fix the recursive locking issues.

Fixes: ffd5869d ("iommu/vt-d: Replace spin_lock_irqsave() with spin_lock()")
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220817025650.3253959-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.comSigned-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>