On 26.04.2017 12:08, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
On 26/04/17 07:53, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
+mutex_lock(>tasks_lock);
+list_for_each_entry(vfio_task, >tasks, list) {
+if (vfio_task->pasid != svm.pasid)
+continue;
+
+ret =
On 26/04/17 07:53, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> +mutex_lock(>tasks_lock);
>> +list_for_each_entry(vfio_task, >tasks, list) {
>> +if (vfio_task->pasid != svm.pasid)
>> +continue;
>> +
>> +ret = iommu_unbind_task(device->dev, svm.pasid, flags);
>>
Hi Jean,
On 27.02.2017 20:54, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
Add two new ioctl for VFIO devices. VFIO_DEVICE_BIND_TASK creates a bond
between a device and a process address space, identified by a
device-specific ID named PASID. This allows the device to target DMA
transactions at the process
;ashok@intel.com>; Pan,
> Jacob
> jun <jacob.jun....@intel.com>; Joerg Roedel <j...@8bytes.org>; Robin Murphy
> <robin.mur...@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 29/30] vfio: Add support for Shared Virtual Memory
>
> On 24/03/17 07:46, Liu, Yi L wrote:
> [.
On 24/03/17 07:46, Liu, Yi L wrote:
[...]
So we need some kind of high-level classification that the vIOMMU
must communicate to the physical one. Each IOMMU flavor would get a
unique, global identifier, simply to make sure that vIOMMU and pIOMMU speak
>> the same language.
..@intel.com>; Raj, Ashok <ashok@intel.com>; Pan,
> Jacob
> jun <jacob.jun....@intel.com>; Joerg Roedel <j...@8bytes.org>; Robin Murphy
> <robin.mur...@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 29/30] vfio: Add support for Shared Virtual Memory
>
> On 23/03
Hi Jean,
Thx for the excellent ideas. Pls refer to comments inline.
[...]
> > Hi Jean,
> >
> > I'm working on virtual SVM, and have some comments on the VFIO channel
> > definition.
>
> Thanks a lot for the comments, this is quite interesting to me. I just have
> some
> concerns about
On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 19:37:56 +
Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > For invalidation, I've following info in in pseudo code.
> > struct iommu_svm_tlb_invalidate_info
> > {
> >__u32 inv_type;
> > #define IOTLB_INV (1 << 0)
> > #define
>> linux-...@vger.kernel.org; Bjorn Helgaas <bhelg...@google.com>; David
>> Woodhouse <dw...@infradead.org>; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; Nate
>> Watterson <nwatt...@qti.qualcomm.com>
>> Subject: [RFC PATCH 29/30] vfio: Add support for Shared Virtual M
arv Abdulhamid <ha...@qti.qualcomm.com>;
> linux-...@vger.kernel.org; Bjorn Helgaas <bhelg...@google.com>; David
> Woodhouse <dw...@infradead.org>; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; Nate
> Watterson <nwatt...@qti.qualcomm.com>
> Subject: [RFC PATCH 29/30]
Hi Alex,
Thanks for the feedback!
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 08:54:09PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 19:54:40 +
> Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
[...]
> >
> > +static long vfio_svm_ioctl(struct vfio_device *device, unsigned int cmd,
> > +
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 19:54:40 +
Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> Add two new ioctl for VFIO devices. VFIO_DEVICE_BIND_TASK creates a bond
> between a device and a process address space, identified by a
> device-specific ID named PASID. This allows the device to
Add two new ioctl for VFIO devices. VFIO_DEVICE_BIND_TASK creates a bond
between a device and a process address space, identified by a
device-specific ID named PASID. This allows the device to target DMA
transactions at the process virtual addresses without a need for mapping
and unmapping buffers
13 matches
Mail list logo