On Tue, 2013-04-02 at 18:18 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: > Cc'ing Alex Williamson > > Alex, can you please review the iommu-group part of this patch?
Sure, it looks pretty reasonable. AIUI, all PCI devices are below some kind of host bridge that is either new and supports partitioning or old and doesn't. I don't know if that's a visibility or isolation requirement, perhaps PCI ACS-ish. In the new host bridge case, each device gets a group. This seems not to have any quirks for multifunction devices though. On AMD and Intel IOMMUs we test multifunction device ACS support to determine whether all the functions should be in the same group. Is there any reason to trust multifunction devices on PAMU? I also find it curious what happens to the iommu group of the host bridge. In the partitionable case the host bridge group is removed, in the non-partitionable case the host bridge group becomes the group for the children, removing the host bridge. It's unique to PAMU so far that these host bridges are even in an iommu group (x86 only adds pci devices), but I don't see it as necessarily wrong leaving it in either scenario. Does it solve some problem to remove them from the groups? Thanks, Alex _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
