search for: bb4cc4910750

...f (ret) > return ret; > > + ret = arch_validate_virtio_features(dev); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) > return 0; > > diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h > index bb4cc4910750..3f4117adf311 100644 > --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h > +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h > @@ -459,4 +459,5 @@ static inline void virtio_cwrite64(struct virtio_device *vdev, > _r; \ > }) > > +int arch_validate_virtio_features(struct virtio_device *dev); &gt...

...f (ret) > return ret; > > + ret = arch_validate_virtio_features(dev); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) > return 0; > > diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h > index bb4cc4910750..3f4117adf311 100644 > --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h > +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h > @@ -459,4 +459,5 @@ static inline void virtio_cwrite64(struct virtio_device *vdev, > _r; \ > }) > > +int arch_validate_virtio_features(struct virtio_device *dev); &gt...

Hi all, The goal of the series is to give a chance to the architecture to validate VIRTIO device features. in this respin: 1) I kept removed the ack from Jason as I reworked the patch @Jason, the nature and goal of the patch did not really changed please can I get back your acked-by with these changes? 2) I suppressed the unnecessary verbosity of the architecture specific

Hi all, The goal of the series is to give a chance to the architecture to validate VIRTIO device features. in this respin: I use the original idea from Connie for an optional arch_has_restricted_memory_access. I renamed the callback accordingly, added the definition of ARCH_HAS_RESTRICTED_MEMORY_ACCESS inside the VIRTIO Kconfig and the selection in the PROTECTED_VIRTUALIZATION_GUEST config

Hi all, I changed the patch subject to reflect the content, becoming more general. 1) I removed the ack from Christian and Jason even far as I understand they gave it for the functionality more than for the implementation. @Jason, @Christian, please can I get back your acked-by with these changes? 2) previous patch had another name: [PATCH v3 0/1] s390: virtio: let arch choose to

...ng_transport_features(struct virtio_device *vdev) break; case VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1: break; - case VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM: + case VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM: break; case VIRTIO_F_RING_PACKED: break; diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h index bb4cc4910750..f2cc2a0df174 100644 --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ static inline bool virtio_has_iommu_quirk(const struct virtio_device *vdev) * Note the reverse polarity of the quirk feature (compared to most * other features), this is for compat...

...virtio_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *dev) if (ret) return ret; + ret = arch_validate_virtio_features(dev); + if (ret) + return ret; + if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) return 0; diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h index bb4cc4910750..3f4117adf311 100644 --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h @@ -459,4 +459,5 @@ static inline void virtio_cwrite64(struct virtio_device *vdev, _r; \ }) +int arch_validate_virtio_features(struct virtio_device *dev); #endif /* _LINUX_VIRTIO_CONFIG_H */ -...

...virtio_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *dev) if (ret) return ret; + ret = arch_validate_virtio_features(dev); + if (ret) + return ret; + if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) return 0; diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h index bb4cc4910750..3f4117adf311 100644 --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h @@ -459,4 +459,5 @@ static inline void virtio_cwrite64(struct virtio_device *vdev, _r; \ }) +int arch_validate_virtio_features(struct virtio_device *dev); #endif /* _LINUX_VIRTIO_CONFIG_H */ -...

...f (ret) > return ret; > > + ret = arch_validate_virtio_features(dev); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) > return 0; > > diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h > index bb4cc4910750..3f4117adf311 100644 > --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h > +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h > @@ -459,4 +459,5 @@ static inline void virtio_cwrite64(struct virtio_device *vdev, > _r; \ > }) > > +int arch_validate_virtio_features(struct virtio_device *dev); &gt...

...virtio_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *dev) if (ret) return ret; + ret = arch_validate_virtio_features(dev); + if (ret) + return ret; + if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) return 0; diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h index bb4cc4910750..3f4117adf311 100644 --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h @@ -459,4 +459,5 @@ static inline void virtio_cwrite64(struct virtio_device *vdev, _r; \ }) +int arch_validate_virtio_features(struct virtio_device *dev); #endif /* _LINUX_VIRTIO_CONFIG_H */ -...

...io_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *dev) if (ret) return ret; + ret = arch_has_restricted_memory_access(dev); + if (ret) + return ret; + if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) return 0; diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h index bb4cc4910750..f6b82541c497 100644 --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h @@ -459,4 +459,13 @@ static inline void virtio_cwrite64(struct virtio_device *vdev, _r; \ }) +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_RESTRICTED_MEMORY_ACCESS +int arch_has_restricted_memory_access(struct virti...

...IO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM)) { + dev_warn(&dev->dev, + "device must provide VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } + } + if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) return 0; diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h index bb4cc4910750..e380664642b4 100644 --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h @@ -459,4 +459,13 @@ static inline void virtio_cwrite64(struct virtio_device *vdev, _r; \ }) +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_RESTRICTED_VIRTIO_MEMORY_ACCESS +int arch_has_restricted_virtio_memory_acces...

...ng_transport_features(struct virtio_device *vdev) break; case VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1: break; - case VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM: + case VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM: break; case VIRTIO_F_RING_PACKED: break; diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h index bb4cc4910750..f2cc2a0df174 100644 --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ static inline bool virtio_has_iommu_quirk(const struct virtio_device *vdev) * Note the reverse polarity of the quirk feature (compared to most * other features), this is for compat...

We used to have use a single parent for all DMA operations. This tends to complicate the mdev based hardware virtio datapath offloading which may not implement the control path over datapath like ctrl vq in the case of virtio-net. So this series tries to intorduce per DMA domain by allowing trasnport to specify the parent device for each virtqueue. Then for the case of virtio-mdev device, it can

...ld be needed here; are there architectures where we'd only require IOMMU_PLATFORM for a subset of virtio devices?] > + > if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) > return 0; > > diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h > index bb4cc4910750..f6b82541c497 100644 > --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h > +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h > @@ -459,4 +459,13 @@ static inline void virtio_cwrite64(struct virtio_device *vdev, > _r; \ > }) > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_RESTRICTED_MEMORY_ACCESS > +int arch_h...

...ld be needed here; are there architectures where we'd only require IOMMU_PLATFORM for a subset of virtio devices?] > + > if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) > return 0; > > diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_config.h b/include/linux/virtio_config.h > index bb4cc4910750..f6b82541c497 100644 > --- a/include/linux/virtio_config.h > +++ b/include/linux/virtio_config.h > @@ -459,4 +459,13 @@ static inline void virtio_cwrite64(struct virtio_device *vdev, > _r; \ > }) > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_RESTRICTED_MEMORY_ACCESS > +int arch_h...

Use generic names for the quirks to make it clear it is not just about the IOMMU, it's about DMA access in general. changes from v1: added patch 2 Michael S. Tsirkin (2): virtio: VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM -> VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM virtio: virtio_has_iommu_quirk -> virtio_has_dma_quirk arch/um/drivers/virtio_uml.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_object.c | 2

Hi all, The goal of the series is to give a chance to the architecture to validate VIRTIO device features. in this respin: The tests are back to virtio_finalize_features. No more argument for the architecture callback which only reports if the architecture needs guest memory access restrictions for VIRTIO. I renamed the callback to arch_has_restricted_virtio_memory_access, and the config

Hi all, The goal of the series is to give a chance to the architecture to validate VIRTIO device features. in this respin: 1) I kept removed the ack from Jason as I reworked the patch @Jason, the nature and goal of the patch did not really changed please can I get back your acked-by with these changes? 2) Rewording for warning messages Regards, Pierre Pierre Morel (2):

Hi all, The goal of the series is to give a chance to the architecture to validate VIRTIO device features. in this respin: 1) I kept removed the ack from Jason as I reworked the patch @Jason, the nature and goal of the patch did not really changed please can I get back your acked-by with these changes? 2) Rewording for warning messages Regards, Pierre Pierre Morel (2):