On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 06:05:49PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 01:53:37PM +1100, David Gibson wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > Could you explain why here device address space has things to do with
> > > PCI BARs? I thought BARs are for CPU address space only (so that CPU
> > > can ac
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 01:53:37PM +1100, David Gibson wrote:
[...]
> > Could you explain why here device address space has things to do with
> > PCI BARs? I thought BARs are for CPU address space only (so that CPU
> > can access PCI registers via MMIO manner), am I wrong?
>
> In short, yes. So
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 05:04:33PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:38:01 +0800
> Peter Xu wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:52:52PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > Yes, this patch just tried to move VT-d forward a bit, rather than do
> > > >
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:52:52PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 11:44:41 +0800
> Peter Xu wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:56:50AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 22:41:26 +0800
> > > Peter Xu wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is preparation work
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:16:50PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:30:12AM +1100, David Gibson wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > +static void vtd_switch_address_space(IntelIOMMUState *s, bool enabled)
> > > +{
> > > +GHashTableIter iter;
> > > +VTDBus *vtd_bus;
> > > +VTDAd
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 03:57:59PM -0800, no-re...@patchew.org wrote:
[...]
> /tmp/qemu-test/src/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c: In function
> ‘vtd_switch_address_space’:
> /tmp/qemu-test/src/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c:1196: warning: implicit declaration
> of function ‘trace_vtd_switch_address_space’
> /tmp/
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 03:02:54PM -0800, no-re...@patchew.org wrote:
[...]
> === OUTPUT BEGIN ===
> Checking PATCH 1/1: intel_iommu: allow dynamic switch of IOMMU region...
> ERROR: "(foo**)" should be "(foo **)"
> #55: FILE: hw/i386/intel_iommu.c:1190:
> +while (g_hash_table_iter_next (&ite
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 05:04:33PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:38:01 +0800
> Peter Xu wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:52:52PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > Yes, this patch just tried to move VT-d forward a bit, rather than do
> > > >
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:38:01 +0800
Peter Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:52:52PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > Yes, this patch just tried to move VT-d forward a bit, rather than do
> > > it once and for all. I think we can do better than this in the future,
> > > for ex
Hi,
Your series failed automatic build test. Please find the testing commands and
their output below. If you have docker installed, you can probably reproduce it
locally.
Type: series
Message-id: 1482158486-18597-1-git-send-email-pet...@redhat.com
Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] intel_iommu: allow
Hi,
Your series seems to have some coding style problems. See output below for
more information:
Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] intel_iommu: allow dynamic switch of IOMMU region
Message-id: 1482158486-18597-1-git-send-email-pet...@redhat.com
Type: series
=== TEST SCRIPT BEGIN ===
#!/bin/bash
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:52:52PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
[...]
> > Yes, this patch just tried to move VT-d forward a bit, rather than do
> > it once and for all. I think we can do better than this in the future,
> > for example, one address space per guest IOMMU domain (as you have
> > me
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 11:44:41 +0800
Peter Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:56:50AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 22:41:26 +0800
> > Peter Xu wrote:
> >
> > > This is preparation work to finally enabled dynamic switching ON/OFF for
> > > VT-d protection. The old VT
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:30:12AM +1100, David Gibson wrote:
[...]
> > +static void vtd_switch_address_space(IntelIOMMUState *s, bool enabled)
> > +{
> > +GHashTableIter iter;
> > +VTDBus *vtd_bus;
> > +VTDAddressSpace *as;
> > +int i;
> > +
> > +g_hash_table_iter_init(&iter,
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:56:50AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 22:41:26 +0800
> Peter Xu wrote:
>
> > This is preparation work to finally enabled dynamic switching ON/OFF for
> > VT-d protection. The old VT-d codes is using static IOMMU region, and
> > that won't satisfy v
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 10:41:26PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> This is preparation work to finally enabled dynamic switching ON/OFF for
> VT-d protection. The old VT-d codes is using static IOMMU region, and
> that won't satisfy vfio-pci device listeners.
>
> Let me explain.
>
> vfio-pci devices dep
On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 22:41:26 +0800
Peter Xu wrote:
> This is preparation work to finally enabled dynamic switching ON/OFF for
> VT-d protection. The old VT-d codes is using static IOMMU region, and
> that won't satisfy vfio-pci device listeners.
>
> Let me explain.
>
> vfio-pci devices depend o
This is preparation work to finally enabled dynamic switching ON/OFF for
VT-d protection. The old VT-d codes is using static IOMMU region, and
that won't satisfy vfio-pci device listeners.
Let me explain.
vfio-pci devices depend on the memory region listener and IOMMU replay
mechanism to make sur
18 matches
Mail list logo
