lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <429d9c2f-3597-eb29-7764-fad3ec9a934f@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Jun 2021 13:29:39 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     yi.l.liu@...el.com, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Alex Williamson (alex.williamson@...hat.com)\"\"" 
        <alex.williamson@...hat.com>, Eric Auger <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal


在 2021/6/1 下午1:23, Lu Baolu 写道:
> Hi Jason W,
>
> On 6/1/21 1:08 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> 2) If yes, what's the reason for not simply use the fd opened from
>>>> /dev/ioas. (This is the question that is not answered) and what 
>>>> happens
>>>> if we call GET_INFO for the ioasid_fd?
>>>> 3) If not, how GET_INFO work?
>>> oh, missed this question in prior reply. Personally, no special reason
>>> yet. But using ID may give us opportunity to customize the management
>>> of the handle. For one, better lookup efficiency by using xarray to
>>> store the allocated IDs. For two, could categorize the allocated IDs
>>> (parent or nested). GET_INFO just works with an input FD and an ID.
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure I get this, for nesting cases you can still make the 
>> child an fd.
>>
>> And a question still, under what case we need to create multiple 
>> ioasids on a single ioasid fd?
>
> One possible situation where multiple IOASIDs per FD could be used is
> that devices with different underlying IOMMU capabilities are sharing a
> single FD. In this case, only devices with consistent underlying IOMMU
> capabilities could be put in an IOASID and multiple IOASIDs per FD could
> be applied.
>
> Though, I still not sure about "multiple IOASID per-FD" vs "multiple
> IOASID FDs" for such case.


Right, that's exactly my question. The latter seems much more easier to 
be understood and implemented.

Thanks


>
> Best regards,
> baolu
>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ