On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:09:11AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 03:40:25AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > > From: Jason Gunthorpe <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2021 1:45 AM > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 02:38:39PM +0800, Liu Yi L wrote: > > > > This patch adds IOASID allocation/free interface per iommufd. When > > > > allocating an IOASID, userspace is expected to specify the type and > > > > format information for the target I/O page table. > > > > > > > > This RFC supports only one type (IOMMU_IOASID_TYPE_KERNEL_TYPE1V2), > > > > implying a kernel-managed I/O page table with vfio type1v2 mapping > > > > semantics. For this type the user should specify the addr_width of > > > > the I/O address space and whether the I/O page table is created in > > > > an iommu enfore_snoop format. enforce_snoop must be true at this point, > > > > as the false setting requires additional contract with KVM on handling > > > > WBINVD emulation, which can be added later. > > > > > > > > Userspace is expected to call IOMMU_CHECK_EXTENSION (see next patch) > > > > for what formats can be specified when allocating an IOASID. > > > > > > > > Open: > > > > - Devices on PPC platform currently use a different iommu driver in > > > > vfio. > > > > Per previous discussion they can also use vfio type1v2 as long as > > > > there > > > > is a way to claim a specific iova range from a system-wide address > > > > space. > > > > This requirement doesn't sound PPC specific, as addr_width for pci > > > devices > > > > can be also represented by a range [0, 2^addr_width-1]. This RFC > > > > hasn't > > > > adopted this design yet. We hope to have formal alignment in v1 > > > discussion > > > > and then decide how to incorporate it in v2. > > > > > > I think the request was to include a start/end IO address hint when > > > creating the ios. When the kernel creates it then it can return the > > > > is the hint single-range or could be multiple-ranges? > > David explained it here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/YMrKksUeNW%2FPEGPM@yekko/
Apparently not well enough. I've attempted again in this thread.
> qeumu needs to be able to chooose if it gets the 32 bit range or 64
> bit range.
No. qemu needs to supply *both* the 32-bit and 64-bit range to its
guest, and therefore needs to request both from the host.
Or rather, it *might* need to supply both. It will supply just the
32-bit range by default, but the guest can request the 64-bit range
and/or remove and resize the 32-bit range via hypercall interfaces.
Vaguely recent Linux guests certainly will request the 64-bit range in
addition to the default 32-bit range.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ iommu mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
