[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201109000550.GD32074@araj-mobl1.jf.intel.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 16:05:50 -0800
From: "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
"vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
"Dey, Megha" <megha.dey@...el.com>,
"maz@...nel.org" <maz@...nel.org>,
"bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, "Lu, Baolu" <baolu.lu@...el.com>,
"Kumar, Sanjay K" <sanjay.k.kumar@...el.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"kwankhede@...dia.com" <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
"eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"parav@...lanox.com" <parav@...lanox.com>,
"rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"netanelg@...lanox.com" <netanelg@...lanox.com>,
"shahafs@...lanox.com" <shahafs@...lanox.com>,
"yan.y.zhao@...ux.intel.com" <yan.y.zhao@...ux.intel.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"Ortiz, Samuel" <samuel.ortiz@...el.com>,
"Hossain, Mona" <mona.hossain@...el.com>,
"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/17] PCI: add SIOV and IMS capability detection
Hi Jason
On Sun, Nov 08, 2020 at 07:41:42PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 08, 2020 at 10:11:24AM -0800, Raj, Ashok wrote:
>
> > > On (kvm) virtualization the addr/data pair the IRQ domain hands out
> > > doesn't work. It is some fake thing.
> >
> > Is it really some fake thing? I thought the vCPU and vector are real
> > for a guest, and VMM ensures when interrupts are delivered they are either.
>
> It is fake in the sense it is programmed into no hardware.
>
> It is real in the sense it is an ABI contract with the VMM.
Ah.. its clear now. That clears up my question below as well.
>
> Yes, no matter what the VMM has to know the guest wants an interrupt
> routed in and setup the VMM part of the equation. With SRIOV this is
> all done with the MSI trapping.
>
> > What if the guest creates some addr in the 0xfee... range how do we
> > take care of interrupt remapping and such without any VMM assist?
>
> Not sure I understand this?
>
My question was based on mis-conception that interrupt entries are directly
written by guest OS for mlx*. My concern was about security isolation if guest OS
has full control of device interrupt store.
I think you clarified it, that interrupts still are marshalled by the VMM
and not in direct control of guest OS. That makes my question moot.
Cheers,
Ashok
Powered by blists - more mailing lists