Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] docs: Add '-device virtio-iommu' entry

["Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 04:32:09PM +0200, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> Document the virtio-iommu device for qemu-system-x86_64. In particular
> note the lack of interrupt remapping, which may be an important
> limitation on x86.
> 
> Suggested-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
> ---
>  qemu-options.hx | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/qemu-options.hx b/qemu-options.hx
> index 83aa59a920..9a1906a748 100644
> --- a/qemu-options.hx
> +++ b/qemu-options.hx
> @@ -976,6 +976,9 @@ SRST
>      Please also refer to the wiki page for general scenarios of VT-d
>      emulation in QEMU: https://wiki.qemu.org/Features/VT-d.
>  
> +``-device virtio-iommu``
> +    Enable a paravirtual IOMMU, that manages DMA isolation and remapping
> +    for all PCI devices, but does not support interrupt remapping.

It would be desirable to document why this is better/worse/equiv to
the intel-iommu device documented just before, so that people have a
better idea of which they should be trying to use.

I'm going to assume intel-iommu is more likely to "just work" out of
the box since it models real hardware that OS are likely to already
support ?  Is that right though ?


Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|