>>> On 07.08.18 at 10:21, <paul.durr...@citrix.com> wrote: >> From: Tian, Kevin [mailto:kevin.t...@intel.com] >> Sent: 07 August 2018 04:25 >> >> > From: Paul Durrant [mailto:paul.durr...@citrix.com] >> > Sent: Saturday, August 4, 2018 1:22 AM >> > >> > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c >> > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c >> > @@ -1830,6 +1830,39 @@ static int __must_check >> > intel_iommu_unmap_page(struct domain *d, >> > return dma_pte_clear_one(d, bfn_to_baddr(bfn)); >> > } >> > >> > +static int intel_iommu_lookup_page(struct domain *d, bfn_t bfn, mfn_t >> > *mfn, >> > + unsigned int *flags) >> >> Not looking at later patches yet... but in concept bfn address >> space is per device instead of per domain. > > Not in this case. Xen has always maintained a single IOMMU address per > virtual machine. That is what BFN refers to.
Nut is that a model we can maintain mid and long term? In particular on ARM, where Julien has told me a single system could have multiple _different_ IOMMUs, I could easily see the address spaces diverging. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
