[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130222000415.GI21011@truffula.fritz.box>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 11:04:15 +1100
From: David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>,
Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu: making IOMMU sysfs nodes API public
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 01:11:51PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 18:38 +1100, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:24:00PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 17:15 +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
[snip]
> > > Adding the window size to sysfs seems more readily convenient,
> > > but is it so hard for userspace to open the files and call a couple
> > > ioctls to get far enough to call IOMMU_GET_INFO? I'm unconvinced the
> > > clutter in sysfs more than just a quick fix. Thanks,
> >
> > And finally, as Alexey points out, isn't the point here so we know how
> > much rlimit to give qemu? Using ioctls we'd need a special tool just
> > to check the dma window sizes, which seems a bit hideous.
>
> Is it more hideous that using iommu groups to report a vfio imposed
> restriction? Are a couple open files and a handful of ioctls worse than
> code to parse directory entries and the future maintenance of an
> unrestricted grab bag of sysfs entries?
The fact that the memory is locked is a vfio restriction, but the
actual dma window size is, genuinely, a property of the group.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists