[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1460988232.22654.7.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 10:03:52 -0400
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@...gnu.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
pbonzini@...hat.com, peterx@...hat.com, cornelia.huck@...ibm.com,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
Kevin Wolf <kwolf@...hat.com>,
Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>, qemu-block@...gnu.org,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] fixup! virtio: convert to use DMA api
On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 16:12 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the issue. The public API is not about how
> the driver works. It doesn't say "don't use DMA API" anywhere, does it?
> It's about telling device whether to obey the IOMMU and
> about discovering whether a device is in fact under the IOMMU.
Apologies, I was wrongly reading this as a kernel patch.
After a brief struggle with "telling device whether to obey the IOMMU",
which is obviously completely impossible from the guest kernel, I
realise my mistake :)
So... on x86 how does this get reflected in the DMAR tables that the
guest BIOS presents to the guest kernel, so that the guest kernel
*knows* which devices are behind which IOMMU?
(And are you fixing the case of assigned PCI devices, which aren't
behind any IOMMU, at the same time as you answer that? :)
--
dwmw2
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (5691 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists