[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6159ef35-c24e-105f-43f6-f90d481f4b24@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 17:00:45 +0200
From: Auger Eric <eric.auger@...hat.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc: "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"cgroups@...r.kernel.org" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>, "Wu, Hao" <hao.wu@...el.com>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 05/18] iommu/ioasid: Redefine IOASID set and allocation
APIs
Hi Jason,
On 4/16/21 4:34 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 04:26:19PM +0200, Auger Eric wrote:
>
>> This was largely done during several confs including plumber, KVM forum,
>> for several years. Also API docs were shared on the ML. I don't remember
>> any voice was raised at those moments.
>
> I don't think anyone objects to the high level ideas, but
> implementation does matter. I don't think anyone presented "hey we
> will tunnel an uAPI through VFIO to the IOMMU subsystem" - did they?
At minimum
https://events19.linuxfoundation.cn/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Shared-Virtual-Memory-in-KVM_Yi-Liu.pdf
But most obviously everything is documented in
Documentation/userspace-api/iommu.rst where the VFIO tunneling is
clearly stated ;-)
But well let's work together to design a better and more elegant
solution then.
Thanks
Eric
>
> Look at the fairly simple IMS situation, for example. This was
> presented at plumbers too, and the slides were great - but the
> implementation was too hacky. It required a major rework of the x86
> interrupt handling before it was OK.
>
> Jason
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists