Re: [RFC 00/13] virtio-iommu on non-devicetree platforms

2019-12-20 Thread Jacob Pan (Jun)
On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 12:20:44 +0100 Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: > On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 07:01:36PM -0800, Jacob Pan (Jun) wrote: > > Hi Jean, > > > > Sorry for the delay, I was out last week. Comments inline below. > > > > On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:02:47 +0100 > > Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:

Re: [RFC 00/13] virtio-iommu on non-devicetree platforms

2019-12-18 Thread Jean-Philippe Brucker
On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 07:01:36PM -0800, Jacob Pan (Jun) wrote: > Hi Jean, > > Sorry for the delay, I was out last week. Comments inline below. > > On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:02:47 +0100 > Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 04:01:02PM -0800, Jacob Pan (Jun) wrote: > > > >

Re: [RFC 00/13] virtio-iommu on non-devicetree platforms

2019-12-03 Thread Jacob Pan (Jun)
Hi Jean, Sorry for the delay, I was out last week. Comments inline below. On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:02:47 +0100 Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 04:01:02PM -0800, Jacob Pan (Jun) wrote: > > > (1) ACPI has one table per vendor (DMAR for Intel, IVRS for AMD > > > and IORT for

Re: [RFC 00/13] virtio-iommu on non-devicetree platforms

2019-11-25 Thread Jean-Philippe Brucker
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 04:01:02PM -0800, Jacob Pan (Jun) wrote: > > (1) ACPI has one table per vendor (DMAR for Intel, IVRS for AMD and > > IORT for Arm). From my point of view IORT is easier to extend, since > > we just need to introduce a new node type. There are no dependencies > > to Arm in

Re: [RFC 00/13] virtio-iommu on non-devicetree platforms

2019-11-25 Thread Jean-Philippe Brucker
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 08:00:46AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > (2) In addition, there are some concerns about having virtio depend on > > ACPI or DT. Some hypervisors (Firecracker, QEMU microvm, kvmtool x86 > > [1]) > > power? In kvmtool it boot with device tree. It also doesn't

Re: [RFC 00/13] virtio-iommu on non-devicetree platforms

2019-11-22 Thread Jacob Pan (Jun)
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 11:49:47 +0100 Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: > I'm seeking feedback on multi-platform support for virtio-iommu. At > the moment only devicetree (DT) is supported and we don't have a > pleasant solution for other platforms. Once we figure out the topology > description, x86

Re: [RFC 00/13] virtio-iommu on non-devicetree platforms

2019-11-22 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:49:47AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: > I'm seeking feedback on multi-platform support for virtio-iommu. At the > moment only devicetree (DT) is supported and we don't have a pleasant > solution for other platforms. Once we figure out the topology > description,

[RFC 00/13] virtio-iommu on non-devicetree platforms

2019-11-22 Thread Jean-Philippe Brucker
I'm seeking feedback on multi-platform support for virtio-iommu. At the moment only devicetree (DT) is supported and we don't have a pleasant solution for other platforms. Once we figure out the topology description, x86 support is trivial. Since the IOMMU manages memory accesses from other