From: sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Cc: joro@8bytes.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] iommu/vt-d: Enable PRI only if the device enables PASID.
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 13:30:24 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cdb6fb16-157e-059e-44ee-515fb4aca9af@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9393b9b2c15564ee84b627a73fb34bd17ebe4a7f.camel@infradead.org>
On 2/7/19 1:15 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-02-07 at 13:09 -0800, Raj, Ashok wrote:
>> You are right.. they are completely orthogonal. We just don't have
>> a way to handle the page-requests for request without PASID's.
>>
>> There are some of the vIOMMU work to pass the PRI to who owns
>> the device, and we can certainly relax it then. This is just to reflect
>> what support exists today. FWIW, even the native driver maybe be able
>> to resolve this if supported.
> As things stand, if a device makes a PRI request without a PASID, it'll
> get told that we didn't manage to bring the page in for it. Which is
> true.
>
> What's the actual problem being fixed by this patch?
Since the request is going to fail any way why go through the process of
enabling it ? Once the functionality (PRI without PASID) is supported,
then they can revert this patch. Just we are trying to expose whats
currently supported clearly.
> Yes, we're going
> to want to hook up a way to pass the PRI to the right place... but why
> add *another* thing that's just going to have to be fixed, by reverting
> this patch?
>
--
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux kernel developer
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-07 21:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-07 18:44 [PATCH v1 1/1] iommu/vt-d: Enable PRI only if the device enables PASID sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy
2019-02-07 20:08 ` David Woodhouse
2019-02-07 21:09 ` Raj, Ashok
2019-02-07 21:15 ` David Woodhouse
2019-02-07 21:22 ` Raj, Ashok
2019-02-07 21:30 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy [this message]
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=cdb6fb16-157e-059e-44ee-515fb4aca9af@linux.intel.com \
--to=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).