On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 05:13:29PM -0700, Mukesh R wrote: > On 8/18/26 16:48, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 04:39:32PM -0700, Mukesh R wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the review. I know there is another set of patches for pvIOMMU > > > ongoing (both came from the same source) and you are probably repeating > > > things, and I appreciate your patience. I'll also try to look for your > > > comments in that patch series going forward. > > > > Those patches look pretty good so you should try to copy their stuff > > :) > > > > They ended up never calling detach, I hope you can do that too. Just > > Unfortunately, my case is a bit different due to the "direct attach" > feature for guest VMs. When a device moves from say a paging domain to be > directly attached to a VM, today, it must first be detached. But since > that just moves to identity, I am discussing with hyp team if detach > is really required, and if we can get rid of it via just attaching to > identity/blocked first before doing the direct attach. Hopefully, it > can be done even if changes are needed in the hypervisor.
You definately cannot have it blip to identity, that is security unacceptable for VFIO. Once it is attached to VFIO it must only be blocked or under a translation controlled by VFIO. Never something else. Jason
