[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB543395858CBB558356C853228CA29@BN9PR11MB5433.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 14:16:27 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
CC: "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
"alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
"jean-philippe@...aro.org" <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
"parav@...lanox.com" <parav@...lanox.com>,
"lkml@...ux.net" <lkml@...ux.net>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"lushenming@...wei.com" <lushenming@...wei.com>,
"eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"yi.l.liu@...ux.intel.com" <yi.l.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
"Tian, Jun J" <jun.j.tian@...el.com>, "Wu, Hao" <hao.wu@...el.com>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com" <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
"kwankhede@...dia.com" <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"dwmw2@...radead.org" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com" <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
"david@...son.dropbear.id.au" <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
"nicolinc@...dia.com" <nicolinc@...dia.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC 14/20] iommu/iommufd: Add iommufd_device_[de]attach_ioasid()
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2021 8:57 PM
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 03:53:52AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>
> > Actually this was one open we closed in previous design proposal, but
> > looks you have a different thought now.
> >
> > vfio maintains one ioas per container. Devices in the container
> > can be attached to different domains (e.g. due to snoop format). Every
> > time when the ioas is updated, every attached domain is updated
> > in accordance.
> >
> > You recommended one-ioas-one-domain model instead, i.e. any device
> > with a format incompatible with the one currently used in ioas has to
> > be attached to a new ioas, even if the two ioas's have the same mapping.
> > This leads to compatibility check at attaching time.
> >
> > Now you want returning back to the vfio model?
>
> Oh, I thought we circled back again.. If we are all OK with one ioas
> one domain then great.
yes, at least I haven't seen a blocking issue with this assumption. Later
when converting vfio type1 into a shim, it could create multiple ioas's
if container would have a list of domains before the shim.
>
> > > If think sis taking in the iommfd_device then there isn't a logical
> > > place to signal the PCIness
> >
> > can you elaborate?
>
> I mean just drop it and document it.
>
got you
Powered by blists - more mailing lists