From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Roedel, Joerg" Subject: Re: kvm PCI assignment & VFIO ramblings Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:14:26 +0200 Message-ID: <20110824091425.GE2079@amd.com> References: <20110823110431.GK2079@amd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Alexey Kardashevskiy , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , Paul Mackerras , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , qemu-devel , iommu , chrisw , Avi Kivity , Anthony Liguori , linuxppc-dev , "benve@cisco.com" To: aafabbri Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:54:27PM -0400, aafabbri wrote: > On 8/23/11 4:04 AM, "Joerg Roedel" wrote: > > That is makes uiommu basically the same as the meta-groups, right? > > Yes, functionality seems the same, thus my suggestion to keep uiommu > explicit. Is there some need for group-groups besides defining sets of > groups which share IOMMU resources? > > I do all this stuff (bringing up sets of devices which may share IOMMU > domain) dynamically from C applications. I don't really want some static > (boot-time or sysfs fiddling) supergroup config unless there is a good > reason KVM/power needs it. > > As you say in your next email, doing it all from ioctls is very easy, > programmatically. I don't see a reason to make this meta-grouping static. It would harm flexibility on x86. I think it makes things easier on power but there are options on that platform to get the dynamic solution too. Joerg -- AMD Operating System Research Center Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24 85609 Dornach General Managers: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd Registration: Dornach, Landkr. Muenchen; Registerger. Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from AM1EHSOBE003.bigfish.com (am1ehsobe003.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.206]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "Microsoft Secure Server Authority" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51DAAB6F68 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:14:48 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:14:26 +0200 From: "Roedel, Joerg" To: aafabbri Subject: Re: kvm PCI assignment & VFIO ramblings Message-ID: <20110824091425.GE2079@amd.com> References: <20110823110431.GK2079@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" In-Reply-To: Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , Paul Mackerras , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , qemu-devel , chrisw , iommu , Avi Kivity , Anthony Liguori , linuxppc-dev , "benve@cisco.com" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:54:27PM -0400, aafabbri wrote: > On 8/23/11 4:04 AM, "Joerg Roedel" wrote: > > That is makes uiommu basically the same as the meta-groups, right? > > Yes, functionality seems the same, thus my suggestion to keep uiommu > explicit. Is there some need for group-groups besides defining sets of > groups which share IOMMU resources? > > I do all this stuff (bringing up sets of devices which may share IOMMU > domain) dynamically from C applications. I don't really want some static > (boot-time or sysfs fiddling) supergroup config unless there is a good > reason KVM/power needs it. > > As you say in your next email, doing it all from ioctls is very easy, > programmatically. I don't see a reason to make this meta-grouping static. It would harm flexibility on x86. I think it makes things easier on power but there are options on that platform to get the dynamic solution too. Joerg -- AMD Operating System Research Center Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24 85609 Dornach General Managers: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd Registration: Dornach, Landkr. Muenchen; Registerger. Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:45772) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qw9Xp-0007ZF-Sz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 05:14:47 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qw9Xo-0000Mi-Ny for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 05:14:45 -0400 Received: from am1ehsobe003.messaging.microsoft.com ([213.199.154.206]:7808 helo=AM1EHSOBE003.bigfish.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qw9Xo-0000MU-Gn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 05:14:44 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:14:26 +0200 From: "Roedel, Joerg" Message-ID: <20110824091425.GE2079@amd.com> References: <20110823110431.GK2079@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] kvm PCI assignment & VFIO ramblings List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: aafabbri Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , Paul Mackerras , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , qemu-devel , chrisw , iommu , Avi Kivity , linuxppc-dev , "benve@cisco.com" On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:54:27PM -0400, aafabbri wrote: > On 8/23/11 4:04 AM, "Joerg Roedel" wrote: > > That is makes uiommu basically the same as the meta-groups, right? > > Yes, functionality seems the same, thus my suggestion to keep uiommu > explicit. Is there some need for group-groups besides defining sets of > groups which share IOMMU resources? > > I do all this stuff (bringing up sets of devices which may share IOMMU > domain) dynamically from C applications. I don't really want some static > (boot-time or sysfs fiddling) supergroup config unless there is a good > reason KVM/power needs it. > > As you say in your next email, doing it all from ioctls is very easy, > programmatically. I don't see a reason to make this meta-grouping static. It would harm flexibility on x86. I think it makes things easier on power but there are options on that platform to get the dynamic solution too. Joerg -- AMD Operating System Research Center Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24 85609 Dornach General Managers: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd Registration: Dornach, Landkr. Muenchen; Registerger. Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632