Thread (118 messages) flat view 118 messages, 11 authors, 2011-08-30

Re: kvm PCI assignment & VFIO ramblings

From: Roedel, Joerg <hidden>
Date: 2011-08-24 09:14:48
Also in: kvm, qemu-devel

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:54:27PM -0400, aafabbri wrote:
On 8/23/11 4:04 AM, "Joerg Roedel" [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
That is makes uiommu basically the same as the meta-groups, right?
Yes, functionality seems the same, thus my suggestion to keep uiommu
explicit.  Is there some need for group-groups besides defining sets of
groups which share IOMMU resources?

I do all this stuff (bringing up sets of devices which may share IOMMU
domain) dynamically from C applications.  I don't really want some static
(boot-time or sysfs fiddling) supergroup config unless there is a good
reason KVM/power needs it.

As you say in your next email, doing it all from ioctls is very easy,
programmatically.
I don't see a reason to make this meta-grouping static. It would harm
flexibility on x86. I think it makes things easier on power but there
are options on that platform to get the dynamic solution too.

	Joerg

-- 
AMD Operating System Research Center

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24 85609 Dornach
General Managers: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd
Registration: Dornach, Landkr. Muenchen; Registerger. Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help