On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Eric Auger wrote: > Robin, > On 04/22/2016 01:02 PM, Robin Murphy wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > > > On 19/04/16 18:13, Eric Auger wrote: > >> Let's introduce a new msi_domain_info flag value, MSI_FLAG_IRQ_REMAPPING > >> meant to tell the domain supports IRQ REMAPPING, also known as Interrupt > >> Translation Service. On Intel HW this IRQ remapping capability is > >> abstracted on IOMMU side while on ARM it is abstracted on MSI controller > >> side. This flag will be used to know whether the MSI passthrough is > >> safe. > > > > Perhaps a nitpick, but given the earlier confusion about what the IOMMU > > flag actually meant this prompts me to wonder if it's worth adjusting > > the general terminology before we propagate it further. What I think we > > actually care about is that one thing or the other "provides MSI > > isolation" rather than "supports MSI remapping", since the latter is all > > to easy to misinterpret the way we did in the SMMU drivers. > > The only concern I have is https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/4/18/283 attempts > to define a PCI bus flag dubbed PCI_BUS_FLAGS_MSI_REMAP combining the > iommu & msi layer info. In that sense x86 people may not be keen of > having different terminaologies. Anyway I will follow the consensus, if any.
Yes, please keep that consistent. It makes 'grep' much more conveniant. Thanks, tglx _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu