Sorry. Resending in plain text. (Gmail).
-- Forwarded message --
Has anyone considered a paravirt approach? That is:
Guest kernel: Write a new IOMMU API back end which does KVM
hypercalls. Exposes VFIO to guest user processes (nested VMs) as
usual.
Host kernel: KVM does thin
Has anyone considered a paravirt approach? That is:
Guest kernel: Write a new IOMMU API back end which does KVM hypercalls.
Exposes VFIO to guest user processes (nested VMs) as usual.
Host kernel: KVM does things like collapse {guest_va -> guest_pa ->
host_pa} mappings to {guest_va -> host_pa}
On 12/20/11 8:30 PM, "Alex Williamson" wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-12-21 at 14:32 +1100, David Gibson wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 04:41:56PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:11:25AM +1100, David Gibson wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, the iommu-api was designed for amd-vi and vt
On 11/15/11 12:10 PM, "Scott Wood" wrote:
> On 11/15/2011 12:34 AM, David Gibson wrote:
>>> +static int allow_unsafe_intrs;
>>> +module_param(allow_unsafe_intrs, int, 0);
>>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(allow_unsafe_intrs,
>>> +"Allow use of IOMMUs which do not support interrupt remapping");
>
I'm going to send out chunks of comments as I go over this stuff. Below
I've covered the documentation file and vfio_iommu.c. More comments coming
soon...
On 11/3/11 1:12 PM, "Alex Williamson" wrote:
> VFIO provides a secure, IOMMU based interface for user space
> drivers, including device ass
On 8/26/11 12:35 PM, "Chris Wright" wrote:
> * Aaron Fabbri (aafab...@cisco.com) wrote:
>> On 8/26/11 7:07 AM, "Alexander Graf" wrote:
>>> Forget the KVM case for a moment and think of a user space device driver. I
>>> as
>>> a user
On 8/26/11 7:07 AM, "Alexander Graf" wrote:
>
>
> Forget the KVM case for a moment and think of a user space device driver. I as
> a user am not root. But I as a user when having access to /dev/vfioX want to
> be able to access the device and manage it - and only it. The admin of that
> box
On 8/23/11 10:01 AM, "Alex Williamson" wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 16:54 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-08-22 at 17:52 -0700, aafabbri wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not following you.
>>>
>>> You have to enforce group/iommu domain assignment whether you have the
>>> existing uio
