On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 06:35:23PM +0000, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi wrote: > I have a bare minimum prototype code that works with a pluggable smmuv3. > > ... > -device pxb-pcie,id=pcie.1,bus_nr=2,bus=pcie.0 \ > -device pcie-root-port,id=pcie.port1,bus=pcie.1 \ > -device arm-smmuv3-nested,id=smmuv1,pci-bus=pcie.1 \ > -device vfio-pci-nohotplug,host=0000:75:00.1,bus=pcie.port1,iommufd=iommufd0 \ > -device pxb-pcie,id=pcie.2,bus_nr=8,bus=pcie.0 \ > -device pcie-root-port,id=pcie.port2,bus=pcie.2,chassis=8 \ > -device arm-smmuv3-nested,id=smmuv2,pci-bus=pcie.2 \ > -device vfio-pci-nohotplug,host=0000:7d:02.1,bus=pcie.port2,iommufd=iommufd0 \
Silly bit of feedback on the interface, but why is the arm-smmuv3-nested property called "pci-bus" instead of just "bus"? All other devices that need to refer to an existing PCI bus use the latter. Is there a reason for this specific one to diverge? -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
