On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 11:38:06AM +0100, Eric Auger wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> On 2/13/24 11:35, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 11:10:16AM +0100, Eric Auger wrote:
> >> In [1] and [2] we attempted to fix a case where a VFIO-PCI device
> >> protected with a virtio-iommu is assign
Hi Michael,
On 2/13/24 11:35, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 11:10:16AM +0100, Eric Auger wrote:
>> In [1] and [2] we attempted to fix a case where a VFIO-PCI device
>> protected with a virtio-iommu is assigned to an x86 guest. On x86
>> the physical IOMMU may have an address w
On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 11:10:16AM +0100, Eric Auger wrote:
> In [1] and [2] we attempted to fix a case where a VFIO-PCI device
> protected with a virtio-iommu is assigned to an x86 guest. On x86
> the physical IOMMU may have an address width (gaw) of 39 or 48 bits
> whereas the virtio-iommu expose
Hi Jean,
On 2/8/24 15:42, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 11:10:16AM +0100, Eric Auger wrote:
>> In [1] and [2] we attempted to fix a case where a VFIO-PCI device
>> protected with a virtio-iommu is assigned to an x86 guest. On x86
>> the physical IOMMU may have an address w
On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 11:10:16AM +0100, Eric Auger wrote:
> In [1] and [2] we attempted to fix a case where a VFIO-PCI device
> protected with a virtio-iommu is assigned to an x86 guest. On x86
> the physical IOMMU may have an address width (gaw) of 39 or 48 bits
> whereas the virtio-iommu expose
In [1] and [2] we attempted to fix a case where a VFIO-PCI device
protected with a virtio-iommu is assigned to an x86 guest. On x86
the physical IOMMU may have an address width (gaw) of 39 or 48 bits
whereas the virtio-iommu exposes a 64b input address space by default.
Hence the guest may try to u
