linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/19] iommufd: Add VIOMMU infrastructure (Part-1)

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: <20241001134424.GE1365916@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2024 10:44:24 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@....com>
Cc: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>,
	"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
	"will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
	"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
	"suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
	"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
	"dwmw2@...radead.org" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	"baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com" <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
	"shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
	"eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
	"jean-philippe@...aro.org" <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
	"mdf@...nel.org" <mdf@...nel.org>,
	"mshavit@...gle.com" <mshavit@...gle.com>,
	"shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com" <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
	"smostafa@...gle.com" <smostafa@...gle.com>,
	"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/19] iommufd: Add VIOMMU infrastructure (Part-1)

On Tue, Oct 01, 2024 at 03:06:57PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> I've just read in this thread that "it should be generally restricted to the
> number of pIOMMUs, although likely (not 100% sure) we could do multiple
> vIOMMUs on a single-pIOMMU system. Any reason for doing that?"? thought "we
> have every reason to do that, unless p means something different", so I
> decided to ask :) Thanks,

I think that was inteded as "multiple vIOMMUs per pIOMMU within a
single VM".

There would always be multiple vIOMMUs per pIOMMU across VMs/etc.

Jason