[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <086ca28f-42e5-a432-8bef-ac47a0a6df45@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 14:46:05 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal
On 09/06/21 13:57, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 02:49:32AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>
>> Last unclosed open. Jason, you dislike symbol_get in this contract per
>> earlier comment. As Alex explained, looks it's more about module
>> dependency which is orthogonal to how this contract is designed. What
>> is your opinion now?
>
> Generally when you see symbol_get like this it suggests something is
> wrong in the layering..
>
> Why shouldn't kvm have a normal module dependency on drivers/iommu?
It allows KVM to load even if there's an "install /bin/false" for vfio
(typically used together with the blacklist directive) in modprobe.conf.
This rationale should apply to iommu as well.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists