>-----Original Message-----
>From: Joao Martins <joao.m.mart...@oracle.com>
>Subject: Re: [PATCH RFCv2 1/8] backends/iommufd: Introduce helper
>function iommufd_device_get_hw_capabilities()
>
>On 26/02/2024 07:29, Duan, Zhenzhong wrote:
>> Hi Joao,
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Joao Martins <joao.m.mart...@oracle.com>
>>> Subject: [PATCH RFCv2 1/8] backends/iommufd: Introduce helper
>function
>>> iommufd_device_get_hw_capabilities()
>>>
>>> The new helper will fetch vendor agnostic IOMMU capabilities supported
>>> both by hardware and software. Right now it is only iommu dirty
>>> tracking.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Joao Martins <joao.m.mart...@oracle.com>
>>> ---
>>> backends/iommufd.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> include/sysemu/iommufd.h | 2 ++
>>> 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/backends/iommufd.c b/backends/iommufd.c
>>> index d92791bba935..8486894f1b3f 100644
>>> --- a/backends/iommufd.c
>>> +++ b/backends/iommufd.c
>>> @@ -237,3 +237,28 @@ void iommufd_device_init(IOMMUFDDevice
>*idev)
>>> host_iommu_base_device_init(&idev->base, HID_IOMMUFD,
>>> sizeof(IOMMUFDDevice));
>>> }
>>> +
>>> +int iommufd_device_get_hw_capabilities(IOMMUFDDevice *idev,
>uint64_t
>>> *caps,
>>> + Error **errp)
>>> +{
>>> + struct iommu_hw_info info = {
>>> + .size = sizeof(info),
>>> + .flags = 0,
>>> + .dev_id = idev->devid,
>>> + .data_len = 0,
>>> + .__reserved = 0,
>>> + .data_uptr = 0,
>>> + .out_capabilities = 0,
>>> + };
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + ret = ioctl(idev->iommufd->fd, IOMMU_GET_HW_INFO, &info);
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + error_setg_errno(errp, errno,
>>> + "Failed to get hardware info capabilities");
>>> + } else {
>>> + *caps = info.out_capabilities;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>
>> This helper is redundant with https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-
>devel/2024-02/msg00031.html
>> We have to get other elements in info in nesting series, so mind using that
>helper
>> Instead to avoid redundancy? I can move that patch ahead for your usage.
>>
>
>Sure.
>
>Btw, speaking of which. You series could actually be split into two. One for
>iommufd device abstraction part (patch 00-09) and another for the nesting
>bits
>(10-18). FWIW this series here as submitted was actually just placing it on
>top
>of the iommufd device abstraction
I see, will split in next version.
>
>I am still planning on adding this same helper, probably just calling into
>yours. Mostly because I disregard the data/data-size as I am only interested
>in
>vendor agnostic capabilities.
Sounds good.
Thanks
Zhenzhong
