[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6ca65628-1c0e-4ae3-6357-1493f993349e@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 11:08:53 +0800
From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
"Alex Williamson (alex.williamson@...hat.com)"
<alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>
Subject: Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal
On 6/1/21 2:09 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>> device bind should fail if the device somehow isn't compatible with
>>> the scheme the user is tring to use.
>> yeah, I guess you mean to fail the device attach when the IOASID is a
>> nesting IOASID but the device is behind an iommu without nesting support.
>> right?
> Right..
>
Just want to confirm...
Does this mean that we only support hardware nesting and don't want to
have soft nesting (shadowed page table in kernel) in IOASID?
Best regards,
baolu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists