[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 1/3] IOMMU: add option to enable VTD_CAP_CM t

From: Jason Wang
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 1/3] IOMMU: add option to enable VTD_CAP_CM to vIOMMU capility exposoed to guest
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 12:15:48 +0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0

On 2016年11月11日 11:39, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 10:32:42AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:

On 2016年11月10日 06:00, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 03:28:02PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:

On 2016年11月08日 19:04, Aviv B.D wrote:
From: "Aviv Ben-David"<address@hidden>

This capability asks the guest to invalidate cache before each map operation.
We can use this invalidation to trap map operations in the hypervisor.

Like I've asked twice in the past, I want to know why don't you cache
translation faults as what spec required (especially this is a guest visible

Btw, please cc me on posting future versions.

Caching isn't guest visible.
Seems not, if one fault mapping were cached by IOTLB. Guest can notice this
Sorry, I don't get what you are saying.

Spec just says you*can*  cache,
not that you must.

Yes, but what did in this patch is "don't". What I suggest is just a "can",
since anyway the IOTLB entries were limited and could be replaced by other.

Have trouble understanding this. Can you given an example of
a guest visible difference?

I guess this may do the detection:

1) map iova A to be non-present.
2) invalidate iova A
3) map iova A to addr B
4) access iova A

A correct implemented CM may meet fault in step 4, but with this patch, we never.

reply via email to

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