03/11/2017 10:56, Jonas Pfefferle1: > Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote on 11/02/2017 11:17:10 AM: > > > 26/10/2017 14:57, Jonas Pfefferle1: > > > > > > > > Hi @all > > > > > > > > I just stumbled upon this patch while testing on POWER. RTE_IOVA_VA > > will > > > > not work for the sPAPR code since the dma window size is currently > > > > determined by the physical address only. > > > > > > Is it affecting POWER8? > > > > It is. > > > > > > > > > I'm preparing a patch to address this. > > > > > > Any news? > > > Can you use virtual addresses? > > > > After a long discussion with Alexey (CC) we came to the conclusion that > > with the current sPAPR iommu driver we cannot use virtual addresses since > > the iova is restricted to lay in the DMA window which itself is > restricted > > to physical RAM addresses resp. with the current code 0 to hotplug memory > > max. However, Alexey is working on a patch to lift this restriction on > the > > DMA window size which should allow us to do VA:VA mappings in the future. > > For now we should fall back to PA in the dynamic iova mode check. I will > > send an according patch later today. > > I looked into this yesterday but I'm not sure what the right solution is > here. > At the time rte_pci_get_iommu_class is called we already know which IOMMU > types are supported because vfio_get_container_fd resp. > vfio_has_supported_extensions has been called however we do not know which > one is going to be used (Decided later in vfio_setup_device resp. > vfio_set_iommu_type). We can choose a iova mode which is supported by all > types but if the modes are exclusive to the types we have to guess which > one is going to be used. Or let the user decide?
You can keep the old behaviour, restricting to physical memory, until you support virtual addressing. It can be just a #ifdef RTE_ARCH_PPC_64.
