From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35900) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gs8yY-0005MG-Cr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2019 11:26:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gs8yX-0003bj-8M for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2019 11:26:02 -0500 References: <20190117025115.81178-1-aik@ozlabs.ru> <20190207081830.4dcbb822@x1.home> <295fa9ca-29c1-33e6-5168-8991bc0ef7b1@ozlabs.ru> <20190207202620.23e9c063@x1.home> <20190208052849.GB6434@umbus.fritz.box> <20190208085235.12583ada@x1.home> From: Daniel Henrique Barboza Message-ID: Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 14:25:50 -0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190208085235.12583ada@x1.home> Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qemu 0/3] spapr_pci, vfio: NVIDIA V100 + P9 passthrough List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alex Williamson , David Gibson Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Piotr Jaroszynski , Jose Ricardo Ziviani On 2/8/19 1:52 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: >> Hm. If the GPU memory is really separate from main RAM, which it >> sounds like, I don't think it makes sense to account it against the >> same locked memory limit as regular RAM. > That's true, if the user owns the device and the device provides the > memory backing, it doesn't seem like it should count against the user's > locked memory limit. That'd make things easy for libvirt. Thanks, Sounds good. Is this a QEMU (or even kernel) side change? If so, and we choose to go through with it, I'll wait for a new spin of this series to see what must be done in Libvirt to proper support it. Thanks, DHB