similar to: [PATCH v2 1/3] iommu/virtio: Add topology description to virtio-iommu config space

Hi Eric, On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 11:19:20AM +0100, Auger Eric wrote: > Michael has pushed this solution (putting the "configuration in the PCI > config space"), I think for those main reasons: > - ACPI may not be supported on some archs/hyps But on those there is device-tree, right? > - the virtio-iommu is a PCIe device so binding should not need ACPI > description The

Hi Eric, On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 11:19:20AM +0100, Auger Eric wrote: > Michael has pushed this solution (putting the "configuration in the PCI > config space"), I think for those main reasons: > - ACPI may not be supported on some archs/hyps But on those there is device-tree, right? > - the virtio-iommu is a PCIe device so binding should not need ACPI > description The

Hi Joerg, On 3/2/20 5:16 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 06:25:36PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: >> This solution isn't elegant nor foolproof, but is the best we can do at >> the moment and works with existing virtio-iommu implementations. It also >> enables an IOMMU for lightweight hypervisors that do not rely on >> firmware methods for

I'm seeking feedback on multi-platform support for virtio-iommu. At the moment only devicetree (DT) is supported and we don't have a pleasant solution for other platforms. Once we figure out the topology description, x86 support is trivial. Since the IOMMU manages memory accesses from other devices, the guest kernel needs to initialize the IOMMU before endpoints start issuing DMA.

I'm seeking feedback on multi-platform support for virtio-iommu. At the moment only devicetree (DT) is supported and we don't have a pleasant solution for other platforms. Once we figure out the topology description, x86 support is trivial. Since the IOMMU manages memory accesses from other devices, the guest kernel needs to initialize the IOMMU before endpoints start issuing DMA.

On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 02:01:56PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 11:19:20AM +0100, Auger Eric wrote: > > Michael has pushed this solution (putting the "configuration in the PCI > > config space"), I think for those main reasons: > > - ACPI may not be supported on some archs/hyps > > But on those there is device-tree,

> From: Jean-Philippe Brucker > Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2017 3:18 AM > > Unlike other virtio devices, the virtio-iommu doesn't work independently, > it is linked to other virtual or assigned devices. So before jumping into > device operations, we need to define a way for the guest to discover the > virtual IOMMU and the devices it translates. > > The host must

> From: Jean-Philippe Brucker > Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2017 3:18 AM > > Unlike other virtio devices, the virtio-iommu doesn't work independently, > it is linked to other virtual or assigned devices. So before jumping into > device operations, we need to define a way for the guest to discover the > virtual IOMMU and the devices it translates. > > The host must

> From: Jean-Philippe Brucker [mailto:jean-philippe.brucker at arm.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 2:41 AM > > On 18/04/17 10:51, Tian, Kevin wrote: > >> From: Jean-Philippe Brucker > >> Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2017 3:18 AM > >> > >> Unlike other virtio devices, the virtio-iommu doesn't work independently, > >> it is linked to

> From: Jean-Philippe Brucker [mailto:jean-philippe.brucker at arm.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 2:41 AM > > On 18/04/17 10:51, Tian, Kevin wrote: > >> From: Jean-Philippe Brucker > >> Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2017 3:18 AM > >> > >> Unlike other virtio devices, the virtio-iommu doesn't work independently, > >> it is linked to

Hi Michael, On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 11:09:41AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > No. It's coded into the hardware. Which might even be practical > for bare-metal (e.g. on-board flash), but is very practical > when the device is part of a hypervisor. If its that way on PPC, than fine for them. But since this is enablement for x86, it should follow the x86 platform best practices,

Hi Michael, On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 11:09:41AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > No. It's coded into the hardware. Which might even be practical > for bare-metal (e.g. on-board flash), but is very practical > when the device is part of a hypervisor. If its that way on PPC, than fine for them. But since this is enablement for x86, it should follow the x86 platform best practices,

Hi Michael, On 11/27/18 5:53 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 07:37:54PM +0000, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: >> Implement the virtio-iommu driver, following specification v0.9 [1]. >> >> Since v4 [2] I fixed the issues reported by Eric, and added Reviewed-by >> from Eric and Rob. Thanks! >> >> I changed the specification to fix one

Hi Michael, On 11/27/18 5:53 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 07:37:54PM +0000, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: >> Implement the virtio-iommu driver, following specification v0.9 [1]. >> >> Since v4 [2] I fixed the issues reported by Eric, and added Reviewed-by >> from Eric and Rob. Thanks! >> >> I changed the specification to fix one

The arm-smmu driver can COMPILE_TEST on x86, so expand this to also enable the IORT code so it can be COMPILE_TEST'd too. Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg at nvidia.com> --- drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 2 -- drivers/acpi/Makefile | 2 +- drivers/acpi/arm64/Kconfig | 1 + drivers/acpi/arm64/Makefile | 2 +- drivers/iommu/Kconfig | 1 + 5 files changed, 4 insertions(+),

Hi Joerg, On 12/12/2018 10:35, Joerg Roedel wrote: > Hi, > > to make progress on this, we should first agree on the protocol used > between guest and host. I have a few points to discuss on the protocol > first. > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 06:20:57PM +0000, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: >> [1] Virtio-iommu specification v0.9, sources and pdf >>????

Hi Joerg, On 12/12/2018 10:35, Joerg Roedel wrote: > Hi, > > to make progress on this, we should first agree on the protocol used > between guest and host. I have a few points to discuss on the protocol > first. > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 06:20:57PM +0000, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: >> [1] Virtio-iommu specification v0.9, sources and pdf >>????

On 18/04/17 10:51, Tian, Kevin wrote: >> From: Jean-Philippe Brucker >> Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2017 3:18 AM >> >> Unlike other virtio devices, the virtio-iommu doesn't work independently, >> it is linked to other virtual or assigned devices. So before jumping into >> device operations, we need to define a way for the guest to discover the >> virtual

On 19/12/2018 23:09, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 12:50:29PM +0000, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: >>>> [3] git://linux-arm.org/linux-jpb.git virtio-iommu/v0.9.1 >>>> ???? git://linux-arm.org/kvmtool-jpb.git virtio-iommu/v0.9 >>> >>> Unfortunatly gitweb seems to be broken on linux-arm.org. What is missing >>> in this

Implement the virtio-iommu driver following version 0.5 of the specification [1]. Previous version of this code was sent back in April [2], implementing the first public RFC. Since then there has been lots of progress and discussion on the specification side, and I think the driver is in a good shape now. The reason patches 1-3 are only RFC is that I'm waiting on feedback from the Virtio TC