From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C01FC433DB for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:05:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B31D64F65 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:05:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236483AbhCDTEv (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Mar 2021 14:04:51 -0500 Received: from hqnvemgate24.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.143]:5994 "EHLO hqnvemgate24.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236228AbhCDTEY (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Mar 2021 14:04:24 -0500 Received: from hqmail.nvidia.com (Not Verified[216.228.121.13]) by hqnvemgate24.nvidia.com (using TLS: TLSv1.2, AES256-SHA) id ; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 11:03:44 -0800 Received: from HKMAIL104.nvidia.com (10.18.16.13) by HQMAIL111.nvidia.com (172.20.187.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:43 +0000 Received: from HKMAIL103.nvidia.com (10.18.16.12) by HKMAIL104.nvidia.com (10.18.16.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:02:59 +0000 Received: from NAM11-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.56.174) by HKMAIL103.nvidia.com (10.18.16.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:02:59 +0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=kZ7NdjWDHjomI7Kl+rhQLQJn6XtgHeGSr8jXkM7+dfn7Vp8pymNtiC/qeV4RypFO88liiqnF24gafWLXzVqsPbGOT1UEUanC4zikUXFEoaUL/grgNPEW/7tvRMF2NlROV2JrTVqPbkKsxdCkywHluK1JtAHoOq3HecfVl6+b2aQxQJOIpazY2WM/FGK5BpbCZKt7zrcC4Q5hqY0ig8gODFEha2CS/RwymzcwppxQZe4otxq2uTeIJgh9vjxyJ7hsxDnZ7iE4vIpC9s0TqdSUjC6Bu+5OI/UGz+gSQcpbpHJqjGON0u4V4iLvPDI+rCvxK3S/8Dl7tgQRpyBPHPInFA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=KsoX4K4P4Z7v42HYxZh2fbbvzalzBIz6MU+YUWvMuh8=; b=SG3JYb9N3GWINJGThmiBwuFQAbc13h9uou8vfUSMRgPjU5tVVGB8qyy2vo9Q9w6uIQXhEhFyB8XK9QscSWWzAkDRzXfZVuPs7Vm1F66WnLqH/xqrMnOlin9AQNPXT0xszT1FXHgfWP7JDubKXWgZurIoSFcljW+faQ74ZBSgOWypP1SlN85/acpF3P+TxKEd5B7MRp1EUe+jU7mLL2OdAj3txZ0q/UcBMdJYiWGqZjzynrq3kJBtzDCDKDLIv06MQJy1vDChOid7qLxfTN6f16LqqC+kjkA+1JUNFVf9loXA5gsEsTxN3wxvWZ1yuO+2bjQaF80dsOKjRs/QgwJDIg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nvidia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nvidia.com; arc=none Received: from DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:14a::12) by DM6PR12MB3114.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:11e::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3890.28; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:02:55 +0000 Received: from DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1c62:7fa3:617b:ab87]) by DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1c62:7fa3:617b:ab87%6]) with mapi id 15.20.3912.017; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:02:55 +0000 Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 15:02:53 -0400 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: Jacob Pan CC: Jean-Philippe Brucker , Tejun Heo , LKML , Joerg Roedel , Lu Baolu , David Woodhouse , , , Johannes Weiner , Jean-Philippe Brucker , Alex Williamson , Eric Auger , "Jonathan Corbet" , Raj Ashok , "Tian, Kevin" , Yi Liu , Wu Hao , Dave Jiang Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 15/18] cgroup: Introduce ioasids controller Message-ID: <20210304190253.GL4247@nvidia.com> References: <1614463286-97618-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <1614463286-97618-16-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <20210303131726.7a8cb169@jacob-builder> <20210303160205.151d114e@jacob-builder> <20210304094603.4ab6c1c4@jacob-builder> <20210304175402.GG4247@nvidia.com> <20210304110144.39ef0941@jacob-builder> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210304110144.39ef0941@jacob-builder> X-ClientProxiedBy: MN2PR01CA0018.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:208:10c::31) To DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:14a::12) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from mlx.ziepe.ca (142.162.115.133) by MN2PR01CA0018.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:208:10c::31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3912.17 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:02:55 +0000 Received: from jgg by mlx with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lHtFN-006kRN-VZ; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:02:53 -0400 X-Header: ProcessedBy-CMR-outbound DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nvidia.com; s=n1; t=1614884624; bh=KsoX4K4P4Z7v42HYxZh2fbbvzalzBIz6MU+YUWvMuh8=; h=ARC-Seal:ARC-Message-Signature:ARC-Authentication-Results:Date: From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:X-ClientProxiedBy:MIME-Version: X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType:X-Header; b=Y/+tXoO5Rv7rqnPPVb03AWjy73eBvBv/FvNRCgbIDCXN7yKhA+No1pWHwflPq8mAx ctf7TOKCfllF6lXdt8+8tAkqCHqHlNrCJENCXatL5bK/cgGiZEsysjKJcDc0XGJou1 dsfUs/WDt6irR+h8HZlKm7VTSOGkYGdb6G54n/TfdTP55oPL9KYIgC+FDVfq7HpLbq 9mwPWlfwcBQsMrPi8WLRgeXR0AVDc8Xo/Zf7ta5xDj57rp7VX7WHlMZwAeaVnAiLwB M6VTBAEmhGfqM0aEXTWGxq0U7pOCOBcvP2IhsmGSycNcs+nm2CSD2yzzezItmtAhxg eTpbDFsDYSXZA== Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 11:01:44AM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote: > > For something like qemu I'd expect to put the qemu process in a cgroup > > with 1 PASID. Who cares what qemu uses the PASID for, or how it was > > allocated? > > For vSVA, we will need one PASID per guest process. But that is up to the > admin based on whether or how many SVA capable devices are directly > assigned. I hope the virtual IOMMU driver can communicate the PASID limit and the cgroup machinery in the guest can know what the actual limit is. I was thinking of a case where qemu is using a single PASID to setup the guest kVA or similar Jason From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77B8FC433E0 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F26F464F64 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org F26F464F64 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=nvidia.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B40DB4634B; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rr-wGTNmCTFf; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.linuxfoundation.org (lf-lists.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010:104::8cd3:938]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7951E467FF; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lf-lists.osuosl.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B822C000B; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EBA6C0001 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3650A835ED for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nvidia.com Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mGV71y8kzM9s for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:45 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from hqnvemgate24.nvidia.com (hqnvemgate24.nvidia.com [216.228.121.143]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52A1E835E9 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hqmail.nvidia.com (Not Verified[216.228.121.13]) by hqnvemgate24.nvidia.com (using TLS: TLSv1.2, AES256-SHA) id ; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 11:03:44 -0800 Received: from HKMAIL104.nvidia.com (10.18.16.13) by HQMAIL111.nvidia.com (172.20.187.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:03:43 +0000 Received: from HKMAIL103.nvidia.com (10.18.16.12) by HKMAIL104.nvidia.com (10.18.16.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:02:59 +0000 Received: from NAM11-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.56.174) by HKMAIL103.nvidia.com (10.18.16.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:02:59 +0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=kZ7NdjWDHjomI7Kl+rhQLQJn6XtgHeGSr8jXkM7+dfn7Vp8pymNtiC/qeV4RypFO88liiqnF24gafWLXzVqsPbGOT1UEUanC4zikUXFEoaUL/grgNPEW/7tvRMF2NlROV2JrTVqPbkKsxdCkywHluK1JtAHoOq3HecfVl6+b2aQxQJOIpazY2WM/FGK5BpbCZKt7zrcC4Q5hqY0ig8gODFEha2CS/RwymzcwppxQZe4otxq2uTeIJgh9vjxyJ7hsxDnZ7iE4vIpC9s0TqdSUjC6Bu+5OI/UGz+gSQcpbpHJqjGON0u4V4iLvPDI+rCvxK3S/8Dl7tgQRpyBPHPInFA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=KsoX4K4P4Z7v42HYxZh2fbbvzalzBIz6MU+YUWvMuh8=; b=SG3JYb9N3GWINJGThmiBwuFQAbc13h9uou8vfUSMRgPjU5tVVGB8qyy2vo9Q9w6uIQXhEhFyB8XK9QscSWWzAkDRzXfZVuPs7Vm1F66WnLqH/xqrMnOlin9AQNPXT0xszT1FXHgfWP7JDubKXWgZurIoSFcljW+faQ74ZBSgOWypP1SlN85/acpF3P+TxKEd5B7MRp1EUe+jU7mLL2OdAj3txZ0q/UcBMdJYiWGqZjzynrq3kJBtzDCDKDLIv06MQJy1vDChOid7qLxfTN6f16LqqC+kjkA+1JUNFVf9loXA5gsEsTxN3wxvWZ1yuO+2bjQaF80dsOKjRs/QgwJDIg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nvidia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nvidia.com; arc=none Received: from DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:14a::12) by DM6PR12MB3114.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:11e::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3890.28; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:02:55 +0000 Received: from DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1c62:7fa3:617b:ab87]) by DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1c62:7fa3:617b:ab87%6]) with mapi id 15.20.3912.017; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:02:55 +0000 Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 15:02:53 -0400 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: Jacob Pan Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 15/18] cgroup: Introduce ioasids controller Message-ID: <20210304190253.GL4247@nvidia.com> References: <1614463286-97618-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <1614463286-97618-16-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <20210303131726.7a8cb169@jacob-builder> <20210303160205.151d114e@jacob-builder> <20210304094603.4ab6c1c4@jacob-builder> <20210304175402.GG4247@nvidia.com> <20210304110144.39ef0941@jacob-builder> Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210304110144.39ef0941@jacob-builder> X-ClientProxiedBy: MN2PR01CA0018.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:208:10c::31) To DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:14a::12) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from mlx.ziepe.ca (142.162.115.133) by MN2PR01CA0018.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:208:10c::31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3912.17 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 19:02:55 +0000 Received: from jgg by mlx with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lHtFN-006kRN-VZ; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:02:53 -0400 X-Header: ProcessedBy-CMR-outbound DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nvidia.com; s=n1; t=1614884624; bh=KsoX4K4P4Z7v42HYxZh2fbbvzalzBIz6MU+YUWvMuh8=; h=ARC-Seal:ARC-Message-Signature:ARC-Authentication-Results:Date: From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:X-ClientProxiedBy:MIME-Version: X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType:X-Header; b=Y/+tXoO5Rv7rqnPPVb03AWjy73eBvBv/FvNRCgbIDCXN7yKhA+No1pWHwflPq8mAx ctf7TOKCfllF6lXdt8+8tAkqCHqHlNrCJENCXatL5bK/cgGiZEsysjKJcDc0XGJou1 dsfUs/WDt6irR+h8HZlKm7VTSOGkYGdb6G54n/TfdTP55oPL9KYIgC+FDVfq7HpLbq 9mwPWlfwcBQsMrPi8WLRgeXR0AVDc8Xo/Zf7ta5xDj57rp7VX7WHlMZwAeaVnAiLwB M6VTBAEmhGfqM0aEXTWGxq0U7pOCOBcvP2IhsmGSycNcs+nm2CSD2yzzezItmtAhxg eTpbDFsDYSXZA== Cc: Jean-Philippe Brucker , "Tian, Kevin" , Alex Williamson , Raj Ashok , Jonathan Corbet , Jean-Philippe Brucker , LKML , Dave Jiang , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Johannes Weiner , Tejun Heo , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Wu Hao , David Woodhouse X-BeenThere: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues for Linux IOMMU support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Sender: "iommu" On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 11:01:44AM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote: > > For something like qemu I'd expect to put the qemu process in a cgroup > > with 1 PASID. Who cares what qemu uses the PASID for, or how it was > > allocated? > > For vSVA, we will need one PASID per guest process. But that is up to the > admin based on whether or how many SVA capable devices are directly > assigned. I hope the virtual IOMMU driver can communicate the PASID limit and the cgroup machinery in the guest can know what the actual limit is. I was thinking of a case where qemu is using a single PASID to setup the guest kVA or similar Jason _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 15/18] cgroup: Introduce ioasids controller Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 15:02:53 -0400 Message-ID: <20210304190253.GL4247@nvidia.com> References: <1614463286-97618-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <1614463286-97618-16-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <20210303131726.7a8cb169@jacob-builder> <20210303160205.151d114e@jacob-builder> <20210304094603.4ab6c1c4@jacob-builder> <20210304175402.GG4247@nvidia.com> <20210304110144.39ef0941@jacob-builder> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210304110144.39ef0941@jacob-builder> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nvidia.com; s=n1; t=1614884624; bh=KsoX4K4P4Z7v42HYxZh2fbbvzalzBIz6MU+YUWvMuh8=; h=ARC-Seal:ARC-Message-Signature:ARC-Authentication-Results:Date: From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:X-ClientProxiedBy:MIME-Version: X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType:X-Header; b=Y/+tXoO5Rv7rqnPPVb03AWjy73eBvBv/FvNRCgbIDCXN7yKhA+No1pWHwflPq8mAx ctf7TOKCfllF6lXdt8+8tAkqCHqHlNrCJENCXatL5bK/cgGiZEsysjKJcDc0XGJou1 dsfUs/WDt6irR+h8HZlKm7VTSOGkYGdb6G54n/TfdTP55oPL9KYIgC+FDVfq7HpLbq 9mwPWlfwcBQsMrPi8WLRgeXR0AVDc8Xo/Zf7ta5xDj57rp7VX7WHlMZwAeaVnAiLwB M6VTBAEmhGfqM0aEXTWGxq0U7pOCOBcvP2IhsmGSycNcs+nm2CSD2yzzezItmtAhxg eTpbDFsDYSXZA== List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Sender: "iommu" To: Jacob Pan Cc: Jean-Philippe Brucker , "Tian, Kevin" , Alex Williamson , Raj Ashok , Jonathan Corbet , Jean-Philippe Brucker , LKML , Dave Jiang , iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, Johannes Weiner , Tejun Heo , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Wu Hao , David Woodhouse On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 11:01:44AM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote: > > For something like qemu I'd expect to put the qemu process in a cgroup > > with 1 PASID. Who cares what qemu uses the PASID for, or how it was > > allocated? > > For vSVA, we will need one PASID per guest process. But that is up to the > admin based on whether or how many SVA capable devices are directly > assigned. I hope the virtual IOMMU driver can communicate the PASID limit and the cgroup machinery in the guest can know what the actual limit is. I was thinking of a case where qemu is using a single PASID to setup the guest kVA or similar Jason