> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:iommu- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Joerg Roedel > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 4:27 PM > To: Yoder Stuart-B08248 > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: RFC: vfio / iommu driver for hardware with no iommu > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 04:13:00PM +0000, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote: > > We're aware of the obvious limitations-- no protection, DMA'able > > memory must be physically contiguous and will have no iova->phy > > translation. But there are use cases where all OSes involved are > > trusted and customers can > > live with those limitations. Virtualization is used > > here not to sandbox untrusted code, but to consolidate multiple OSes. > > One of the major points of VFIO is to provide a userspace interface for > hardware > IOMMUs. So if you have a platform without an IOMMU why do you care about VFIO > at > all?
We want to do direct device assignment to user space. So if the device is behind iommu then it will be a secure interface. if device is not behind a iommu then it is insecure. But the user space can access the device. This way we can be consistent with one mechanism to do direct device assignment. Do you suggest that we should use UIO or some other mechanism for non iommu devices ? Thanks -Bharat > > > Joerg > > > _______________________________________________ > iommu mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
