From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45046)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1bhBbI-0003mT-Tn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2016 04:19:25 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1bhBbD-00085q-UH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2016 04:19:23 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51620)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1bhBbD-00085l-O9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2016 04:19:19 -0400
References: <1473060081-17835-1-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com>
	<1473060081-17835-3-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com>
	<2112298c-fe2a-c74f-7a68-a92625cd3533@redhat.com>
	<20160905083804.GB7761@pxdev.xzpeter.org>
	<dcb70f94-76da-da93-8c6a-38b1e40fa479@redhat.com>
	<20160906052733.GA21051@pxdev.xzpeter.org>
	<92b5128b-d6e2-5787-9cea-07fcf90d22a5@redhat.com>
	<20160906081737.GE21051@pxdev.xzpeter.org>
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <8a6c53f9-e3c4-f788-e794-30f28c184418@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 10:19:14 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160906081737.GE21051@pxdev.xzpeter.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] memory: add iommu_notify_flag
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mst@redhat.com, jasowang@redhat.com, vkaplans@redhat.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, wexu@redhat.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, dgibson@redhat.com



On 06/09/2016 10:17, Peter Xu wrote:
> After knowing the possibility that the two consumers might be
> mixturely used in the future (as David has mentioned), I'd vote for a
> bitmask for notification type:
> 
>     IOMMU_NOTIFIER_NONE = 0,
>     IOMMU_NOTIFIER_INVALIDATION = 1,
>     IOMMU_NOTIFIER_ADDITION = 2,

ADDITION really should be "CHANGE" I think, so what about
IOMMU_NOTIFIER_INVALIDATE and IOMMU_NOTIFIER_CHANGE?

For VFIO, would the "invalidate" and "add" callbacks use the same code
or different?

Thanks,

Paolo