From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> Cc: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>, Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@nvidia.com>, Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>, Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>, David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>, Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>, "iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>, Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>, "Martins, Joao" <joao.m.martins@oracle.com>, "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>, Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>, "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>, Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@huawei.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 08/12] iommufd: IOCTLs for the io_pagetable Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 15:57:53 -0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20220328185753.GA1716663@nvidia.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20220328111723.24fa5118.alex.williamson@redhat.com> On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 11:17:23AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 10:46:22 -0300 > Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 07:25:03AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > > > > Based on that here is a quick tweak of the force-snoop part (not compiled). > > > > I liked your previous idea better, that IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY > > started out OK but got weird. So lets fix it back to the way it was. > > > > How about this: > > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fjgunthorpe%2Flinux%2Fcommits%2Fintel_no_snoop&data=04%7C01%7Cjgg%40nvidia.com%7C9d34426f1c1646af43a608da10ded6b5%7C43083d15727340c1b7db39efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637840846514240225%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=%2ByHWyE8Yxcwxe8r8LoMQD9tPh5%2FZPaGfNsUkMlpRfWM%3D&reserved=0 > > > > b11c19a4b34c2a iommu: Move the Intel no-snoop control off of IOMMU_CACHE > > 5263947f9d5f36 vfio: Require that device support DMA cache coherence > > I have some issues with the argument here: > > This will block device/platform/iommu combinations that do not > support cache coherent DMA - but these never worked anyhow as VFIO > did not expose any interface to perform the required cache > maintenance operations. > > VFIO never intended to provide such operations, it only tried to make > the coherence of the device visible to userspace such that it can > perform operations via other means, for example via KVM. The "never > worked" statement here seems false. VFIO is generic. I expect if DPDK connects to VFIO then it will work properly. That is definitely not the case today when dev_is_dma_coherent() is false. This is what the paragraph is talking about. Remember, x86 wires dev_is_dma_coherent() to true, so this above remark is not related to anything about x86. We don't have a way in VFIO to negotiate that 'vfio can only be used with kvm' so I hope no cases like that really do exist :( Do you know of any? > Commit b11c19a4b34c2a also appears to be a behavioral change. AIUI > vfio_domain.enforce_cache_coherency would only be set on Intel VT-d > where snoop-control is supported, this translates to KVM emulating > coherency instructions everywhere except VT-d w/ snoop-control. It seems so. > My understanding of AMD-Vi is that no-snoop TLPs are always coherent, so > this would trigger unnecessary wbinvd emulation on those platforms. I look in the AMD manual and it looks like it works the same as intel with a dedicated IOPTE bit: #define IOMMU_PTE_FC (1ULL << 60) https://www.amd.com/system/files/TechDocs/48882_IOMMU.pdf Pg 79: FC: Force Coherent. Software uses the FC bit in the PTE to indicate the source of the upstream coherent attribute state for an untranslated DMA transaction.1 = the IOMMU sets the coherent attribute state in the upstream request. 0 = the IOMMU passes on the coherent attribute state from the originating request. Device internal address/page table translations are considered "untranslated accesses" by IOMMU.The FC state is returned in the ATS response to the device endpoint via the state of the (N)oSnoop bit. So, currently AMD and Intel have exactly the same HW feature with a different kAPI.. I would say it is wrong that AMD creates kernel owned domains for the DMA-API to use that do not support snoop. > don't know if other archs need similar, but it seems we're changing > polarity wrt no-snoop TLPs from "everyone is coherent except this case > on Intel" to "everyone is non-coherent except this opposite case on > Intel". Yes. We should not assume no-snoop blocking is a HW feature without explicit knowledge that it is. From a kAPI compat perspective IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY only has two impacts: - Only on x86 arch it controls kvm_arch_register_noncoherent_dma() - It triggers IOMMU_CACHE If we look at the list of places where IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY is set: drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c Must have IOMMU_CACHE set/clear to control no-snoop blocking drivers/iommu/amd/iommu.c Always sets its no-snoop block, inconsistent with Intel drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/qcom_iommu.c Must have IOMMU_CACHE set, ARM arch has no kvm_arch_register_noncoherent_dma() From what I could tell in the manuals and the prior discussion SMMU doesn't block no-snoop. ie ARM lies about IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY because it needs IOMM_CACHE set to work. drivers/iommu/fsl_pamu_domain.c drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c Ignore IOMM_CACHE, arch has no kvm_arch_register_noncoherent_dma() No idea if the HW blocks no-snoop or not, but it doesn't matter. So other than AMD, it is OK to change the sense and makes it clearer for future driver authors what they are expected to do with this. Thanks, Jason
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jason Gunthorpe via iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org> To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> Cc: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>, "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>, Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>, Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>, Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@nvidia.com>, Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>, "iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>, "Martins, Joao" <joao.m.martins@oracle.com>, David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 08/12] iommufd: IOCTLs for the io_pagetable Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 15:57:53 -0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20220328185753.GA1716663@nvidia.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20220328111723.24fa5118.alex.williamson@redhat.com> On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 11:17:23AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 10:46:22 -0300 > Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 07:25:03AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > > > > Based on that here is a quick tweak of the force-snoop part (not compiled). > > > > I liked your previous idea better, that IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY > > started out OK but got weird. So lets fix it back to the way it was. > > > > How about this: > > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fjgunthorpe%2Flinux%2Fcommits%2Fintel_no_snoop&data=04%7C01%7Cjgg%40nvidia.com%7C9d34426f1c1646af43a608da10ded6b5%7C43083d15727340c1b7db39efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637840846514240225%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=%2ByHWyE8Yxcwxe8r8LoMQD9tPh5%2FZPaGfNsUkMlpRfWM%3D&reserved=0 > > > > b11c19a4b34c2a iommu: Move the Intel no-snoop control off of IOMMU_CACHE > > 5263947f9d5f36 vfio: Require that device support DMA cache coherence > > I have some issues with the argument here: > > This will block device/platform/iommu combinations that do not > support cache coherent DMA - but these never worked anyhow as VFIO > did not expose any interface to perform the required cache > maintenance operations. > > VFIO never intended to provide such operations, it only tried to make > the coherence of the device visible to userspace such that it can > perform operations via other means, for example via KVM. The "never > worked" statement here seems false. VFIO is generic. I expect if DPDK connects to VFIO then it will work properly. That is definitely not the case today when dev_is_dma_coherent() is false. This is what the paragraph is talking about. Remember, x86 wires dev_is_dma_coherent() to true, so this above remark is not related to anything about x86. We don't have a way in VFIO to negotiate that 'vfio can only be used with kvm' so I hope no cases like that really do exist :( Do you know of any? > Commit b11c19a4b34c2a also appears to be a behavioral change. AIUI > vfio_domain.enforce_cache_coherency would only be set on Intel VT-d > where snoop-control is supported, this translates to KVM emulating > coherency instructions everywhere except VT-d w/ snoop-control. It seems so. > My understanding of AMD-Vi is that no-snoop TLPs are always coherent, so > this would trigger unnecessary wbinvd emulation on those platforms. I look in the AMD manual and it looks like it works the same as intel with a dedicated IOPTE bit: #define IOMMU_PTE_FC (1ULL << 60) https://www.amd.com/system/files/TechDocs/48882_IOMMU.pdf Pg 79: FC: Force Coherent. Software uses the FC bit in the PTE to indicate the source of the upstream coherent attribute state for an untranslated DMA transaction.1 = the IOMMU sets the coherent attribute state in the upstream request. 0 = the IOMMU passes on the coherent attribute state from the originating request. Device internal address/page table translations are considered "untranslated accesses" by IOMMU.The FC state is returned in the ATS response to the device endpoint via the state of the (N)oSnoop bit. So, currently AMD and Intel have exactly the same HW feature with a different kAPI.. I would say it is wrong that AMD creates kernel owned domains for the DMA-API to use that do not support snoop. > don't know if other archs need similar, but it seems we're changing > polarity wrt no-snoop TLPs from "everyone is coherent except this case > on Intel" to "everyone is non-coherent except this opposite case on > Intel". Yes. We should not assume no-snoop blocking is a HW feature without explicit knowledge that it is. From a kAPI compat perspective IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY only has two impacts: - Only on x86 arch it controls kvm_arch_register_noncoherent_dma() - It triggers IOMMU_CACHE If we look at the list of places where IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY is set: drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c Must have IOMMU_CACHE set/clear to control no-snoop blocking drivers/iommu/amd/iommu.c Always sets its no-snoop block, inconsistent with Intel drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/qcom_iommu.c Must have IOMMU_CACHE set, ARM arch has no kvm_arch_register_noncoherent_dma() From what I could tell in the manuals and the prior discussion SMMU doesn't block no-snoop. ie ARM lies about IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY because it needs IOMM_CACHE set to work. drivers/iommu/fsl_pamu_domain.c drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c Ignore IOMM_CACHE, arch has no kvm_arch_register_noncoherent_dma() No idea if the HW blocks no-snoop or not, but it doesn't matter. So other than AMD, it is OK to change the sense and makes it clearer for future driver authors what they are expected to do with this. Thanks, Jason _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-28 18:57 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 244+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-03-18 17:27 [PATCH RFC 00/12] IOMMUFD Generic interface Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 01/12] interval-tree: Add a utility to iterate over spans in an interval tree Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 02/12] iommufd: Overview documentation Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 03/12] iommufd: File descriptor, context, kconfig and makefiles Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-22 14:18 ` Niklas Schnelle 2022-03-22 14:18 ` Niklas Schnelle 2022-03-22 14:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-22 14:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 04/12] kernel/user: Allow user::locked_vm to be usable for iommufd Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-22 14:28 ` Niklas Schnelle 2022-03-22 14:28 ` Niklas Schnelle 2022-03-22 14:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-22 14:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-22 15:29 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-22 15:29 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-22 16:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-22 16:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-24 2:11 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 2:11 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 2:27 ` Jason Wang 2022-03-24 2:27 ` Jason Wang 2022-03-24 2:42 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 2:42 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 2:57 ` Jason Wang 2022-03-24 2:57 ` Jason Wang 2022-03-24 3:15 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 3:15 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 3:50 ` Jason Wang 2022-03-24 3:50 ` Jason Wang 2022-03-24 4:29 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 4:29 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 11:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-24 11:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-28 1:53 ` Jason Wang 2022-03-28 1:53 ` Jason Wang 2022-03-28 12:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-28 12:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-29 4:59 ` Jason Wang 2022-03-29 4:59 ` Jason Wang 2022-03-29 11:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-29 11:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-28 13:14 ` Sean Mooney 2022-03-28 13:14 ` Sean Mooney 2022-03-28 14:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-28 14:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-24 20:40 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-24 20:40 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-24 22:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-24 22:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-24 22:41 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-24 22:41 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-22 16:31 ` Niklas Schnelle 2022-03-22 16:31 ` Niklas Schnelle 2022-03-22 16:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-22 16:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 05/12] iommufd: PFN handling for iopt_pages Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-23 15:37 ` Niklas Schnelle 2022-03-23 15:37 ` Niklas Schnelle 2022-03-23 16:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-23 16:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 06/12] iommufd: Algorithms for PFN storage Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 07/12] iommufd: Data structure to provide IOVA to PFN mapping Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-22 22:15 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-22 22:15 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-23 18:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-23 18:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-24 3:09 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 3:09 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 12:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-24 12:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-25 13:34 ` zhangfei.gao 2022-03-25 13:34 ` zhangfei.gao 2022-03-25 17:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-25 17:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-04-13 14:02 ` Yi Liu 2022-04-13 14:02 ` Yi Liu 2022-04-13 14:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-04-13 14:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-04-13 14:49 ` Yi Liu 2022-04-13 14:49 ` Yi Liu 2022-04-17 14:56 ` Yi Liu 2022-04-17 14:56 ` Yi Liu 2022-04-18 10:47 ` Yi Liu 2022-04-18 10:47 ` Yi Liu 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 08/12] iommufd: IOCTLs for the io_pagetable Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-23 19:10 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-23 19:10 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-23 19:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-23 19:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-23 20:04 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-23 20:04 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-23 20:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-23 20:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-23 22:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-23 22:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-24 7:25 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 7:25 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 13:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-24 13:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-25 2:15 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-25 2:15 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-27 2:32 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-27 2:32 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-27 14:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-27 14:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-28 17:17 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-28 17:17 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-28 18:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message] 2022-03-28 18:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-28 19:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-28 19:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-28 21:26 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-28 21:26 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-24 6:46 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-24 6:46 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-30 13:35 ` Yi Liu 2022-03-30 13:35 ` Yi Liu 2022-03-31 12:59 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-31 12:59 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-04-01 13:30 ` Yi Liu 2022-04-01 13:30 ` Yi Liu 2022-03-31 4:36 ` David Gibson 2022-03-31 4:36 ` David Gibson 2022-03-31 5:41 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-31 5:41 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-31 12:58 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-31 12:58 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-04-28 5:58 ` David Gibson 2022-04-28 5:58 ` David Gibson 2022-04-28 14:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-04-28 14:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-04-29 6:00 ` David Gibson 2022-04-29 6:00 ` David Gibson 2022-04-29 12:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-04-29 12:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-04-30 14:44 ` David Gibson 2022-04-30 14:44 ` David Gibson 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 09/12] iommufd: Add a HW pagetable object Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 10/12] iommufd: Add kAPI toward external drivers Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-23 18:10 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-23 18:10 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-23 18:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-23 18:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-05-11 12:54 ` Yi Liu 2022-05-11 12:54 ` Yi Liu 2022-05-19 9:45 ` Yi Liu 2022-05-19 9:45 ` Yi Liu 2022-05-19 12:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-05-19 12:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 11/12] iommufd: vfio container FD ioctl compatibility Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-23 22:51 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-23 22:51 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-24 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-24 0:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-24 8:13 ` Eric Auger 2022-03-24 8:13 ` Eric Auger 2022-03-24 22:04 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-24 22:04 ` Alex Williamson 2022-03-24 23:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-24 23:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-03-25 3:10 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-25 3:10 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-03-25 11:24 ` Joao Martins 2022-03-25 11:24 ` Joao Martins 2022-04-28 14:53 ` David Gibson 2022-04-28 14:53 ` David Gibson 2022-04-28 15:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-04-28 15:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-04-29 1:21 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-04-29 1:21 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-04-29 6:22 ` David Gibson 2022-04-29 6:22 ` David Gibson 2022-04-29 12:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-04-29 12:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-05-02 4:10 ` David Gibson 2022-05-02 4:10 ` David Gibson 2022-04-29 6:20 ` David Gibson 2022-04-29 6:20 ` David Gibson 2022-04-29 12:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-04-29 12:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-05-02 7:30 ` David Gibson 2022-05-02 7:30 ` David Gibson 2022-05-05 19:07 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-05-05 19:07 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-05-06 5:25 ` David Gibson 2022-05-06 5:25 ` David Gibson 2022-05-06 10:42 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-05-06 10:42 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-05-09 3:36 ` David Gibson 2022-05-09 3:36 ` David Gibson 2022-05-06 12:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-05-06 12:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-05-09 6:01 ` David Gibson 2022-05-09 6:01 ` David Gibson 2022-05-09 14:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-05-09 14:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-05-10 7:12 ` David Gibson 2022-05-10 7:12 ` David Gibson 2022-05-10 19:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-05-10 19:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-05-11 3:15 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-05-11 3:15 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-05-11 16:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-05-11 16:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-05-11 23:23 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-05-11 23:23 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-05-13 4:35 ` David Gibson 2022-05-13 4:35 ` David Gibson 2022-05-11 4:40 ` David Gibson 2022-05-11 4:40 ` David Gibson 2022-05-11 2:46 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-05-11 2:46 ` Tian, Kevin 2022-05-23 6:02 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy 2022-05-23 6:02 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy 2022-05-24 13:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-05-24 13:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-05-25 1:39 ` David Gibson 2022-05-25 1:39 ` David Gibson 2022-05-25 2:09 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy 2022-05-25 2:09 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy 2022-03-29 9:17 ` Yi Liu 2022-03-29 9:17 ` Yi Liu 2022-03-18 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 12/12] iommufd: Add a selftest Jason Gunthorpe 2022-03-18 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-04-12 20:13 ` [PATCH RFC 00/12] IOMMUFD Generic interface Eric Auger 2022-04-12 20:13 ` Eric Auger 2022-04-12 20:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe via iommu 2022-04-12 20:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2022-04-12 20:50 ` Eric Auger 2022-04-12 20:50 ` Eric Auger 2022-04-14 10:56 ` Yi Liu 2022-04-14 10:56 ` Yi Liu
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20220328185753.GA1716663@nvidia.com \ --to=jgg@nvidia.com \ --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \ --cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \ --cc=chaitanyak@nvidia.com \ --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \ --cc=daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com \ --cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \ --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \ --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \ --cc=jasowang@redhat.com \ --cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \ --cc=joao.m.martins@oracle.com \ --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \ --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=mst@redhat.com \ --cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \ --cc=schnelle@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \ --cc=yi.l.liu@intel.com \ --cc=zhukeqian1@huawei.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.