[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 7/7] intel_iommu: support passthrough (PT)

From: Peter Xu
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 7/7] intel_iommu: support passthrough (PT)
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 15:00:22 +0800
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:51:11PM +0800, Lan, Tianyu wrote:
> On 4/20/2017 1:40 PM, Peter Xu wrote:


> >>>a slightly hackish way.
> >>
> >>In my understanding, container->space->as->root cannot work here no matter 
> >>passthru-mode
> >>is enabled or not. The code here is aiming to check if vIOMMU exists. After 
> >>the vfio series,
> >>the vtd_dev_as->root is not initialized to be a iommu MemoryRegion. 
> >>Compared with checking
> >>if it is system_memory(), I think adding a mechanism to get the iommu 
> >>MemoryRegion may
> >>be a better choice. Just like the current pci_device_iommu_address_space().
> >
> >Isn't pci_device_iommu_address_space() used to get that IOMMU memory
> >region? And, one thing to mention is that container->space->as is
> >actually derived from pci_device_iommu_address_space() (when calling
> >vfio_get_group()).
> >
> >I feel like that playing around with an IOMMU memory region is still
> >not clear enough in many cases. I still feel like some day we would
> >like an "IOMMU object". Then, we can register non-iotlb notifiers
> >against that IOMMU object, rather than memory regions...
> Our target is to check whether assigned device is under a vIOMMU.
> We may check whether iommu_fn point has been populated in its pci bus' data
> structure(PCIDevice). This is what pci_device_iommu_address_space()
> does.

Agreed. Thanks,

Peter Xu

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]