Hi all,
On 23.06.2016 17:34, Valentine Sinitsyn wrote:
[..]
So you will have one forward table per cell in order to achieve
partitioning? That may work... In Intel, there is a single table for
them all, and source matching is used for partitioning.
Why do we need a forward table per cell? It's indexed with device_id,
which doesn't change, and the device is assigned to one cell at time.
Looks like one table should also work, or am I missing something?
If all device tables would point to the same interrupt table, all
devices could inject interrupts via any entry in that table, no?
Therefore you need per-cell tables to achieve at least cell-based
partitioning.
I also worried about this. However, iommu_map_interrupt() decides which
index will be programmed into an MSI/IOAPIC reg.
Those registers aren't trustworthy, plus any DMA request of the device
Yes, I was under impression they are. OK, makes sense now, thanks.
Shall we trust bdfs devices send us then? If not (i.e. we assume devices
can send messages with arbitrary ids), we need to silence all IRTEs
(IV=1, IntCtl=0) except those having device assigned in the config.
Valentine
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Jailhouse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
