> From: Jason Gunthorpe <j...@nvidia.com> > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 4:46 AM > > > > I think the name IOASID is fine for the uAPI, the kernel version can > > > be called ioasid_id or something. > > > > ioasid is already an id and then ioasid_id just adds confusion. Another > > point is that ioasid is currently used to represent both PCI PASID and > > ARM substream ID in the kernel. It implies that if we want to separate > > ioasid and pasid in the uAPI the 'pasid' also needs to be replaced with > > another general term usable for substream ID. Are we making the > > terms too confusing here? > > This is why I also am not so sure about exposing the PASID in the API > because it is ultimately a HW specific item. > > As I said to David, one avenue is to have some generic uAPI that is > very general and keep all this deeply detailed stuff, that really only > matters for qemu, as part of a more HW specific vIOMMU driver > interface. >
OK, so the general uAPI will not expose hw_id and just provide everything generic for managing I/O page table (map/unmap, nesting, etc.) through IOASID and then specific uAPI is provided to handle platform specific requirements (hw_id, iova windows, etc.) Thanks Kevin _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
