[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100401160746.GH24846@8bytes.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:07:47 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Tom Lyon <pugs@...n-about.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] uio_pci_generic: extensions to allow access for
non-privileged processes
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 08:40:34AM -0700, Tom Lyon wrote:
> On Thursday 01 April 2010 05:52:18 am Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > > The point of this patch is to beef up the uio_pci_generic driver so that
> > > a non-privileged user process can run a user level driver for most PCIe
> > > devices. This can only be safe if there is an IOMMU in the system with
> > > per-device domains. Privileged users (CAP_SYS_RAWIO) are allowed if
> > > there is no IOMMU.
> >
> > If you rely on an IOMMU you can use the IOMMU-API instead of the DMA-API
> > for dma mappings. This change makes this driver suitable for KVM use
> > too. If the interface is designed clever enough we can even use it for
> > IOMMU emulation for pass-through devices.
> The use with privileged processes and no IOMMUs is still quite useful, so I'd
> rather stick with the DMA interface.
For the KVM use-case we need to be able to specify the io virtual
address for a given process virtual address. This is not possible with
the dma-api interface. So if we want to have uio-dma without an hardware
iommu we need two distinct interfaces for userspace to cover all
use-cases. I don't think its worth it to have two interfaces.
Joerg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists