On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 03:49:44PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
[...]
> I was trying to invalidate the entire address space by sending a big
> IOTLB notification to vfio-pci, which looks like:
>
> IOMMUTLBEntry entry = {
> .target_as = _space_memory,
> .iova = 0,
>
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 08:46:04AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 22:00:00 +0800
> Peter Xu wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:53:57PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 11:06:39 +0800
> > > Peter Xu wrote:
> >
On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 22:00:00 +0800
Peter Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:53:57PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 11:06:39 +0800
> > Peter Xu wrote:
> >
> > > This is preparation work to finally enabled dynamic switching
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 06:25:32PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
[...]
> > > I think this does not give more readability :) May I was wrong, let leave
> > > this for maintainer.
> > >
> > > Thanks :)
> >
> > Thanks for reviewing this series so fast!
> >
> > I have no strong opinion as
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:53:57PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 11:06:39 +0800
> Peter Xu wrote:
>
> > This is preparation work to finally enabled dynamic switching ON/OFF for
> > VT-d protection. The old VT-d codes is using static IOMMU address space,
>
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 11:06:39 +0800
Peter Xu wrote:
> This is preparation work to finally enabled dynamic switching ON/OFF for
> VT-d protection. The old VT-d codes is using static IOMMU address space,
> and that won't satisfy vfio-pci device listeners.
>
> Let me explain.
>
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:32:24PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:25:35PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2017年01月16日 16:12, Peter Xu wrote:
> > >On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:01:00PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > >>
> > >>On 2017年01月16日 15:50, Peter Xu wrote:
> > >>>On
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:25:35PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 2017年01月16日 16:12, Peter Xu wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:01:00PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>
> >>On 2017年01月16日 15:50, Peter Xu wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 02:20:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>>
> >>>[...]
On 2017年01月16日 16:12, Peter Xu wrote:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:01:00PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
On 2017年01月16日 15:50, Peter Xu wrote:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 02:20:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
[...]
diff --git a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
index fd75112..2596f11
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:01:00PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 2017年01月16日 15:50, Peter Xu wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 02:20:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >>>diff --git a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> >>>index fd75112..2596f11 100644
> >>>---
On 2017年01月16日 15:50, Peter Xu wrote:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 02:20:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
[...]
diff --git a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
index fd75112..2596f11 100644
--- a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
+++ b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
@@ -1343,9 +1343,49 @@ static void
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 02:20:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
[...]
> >diff --git a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> >index fd75112..2596f11 100644
> >--- a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> >+++ b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> >@@ -1343,9 +1343,49 @@ static void
On 2017年01月13日 11:06, Peter Xu wrote:
This is preparation work to finally enabled dynamic switching ON/OFF for
VT-d protection. The old VT-d codes is using static IOMMU address space,
and that won't satisfy vfio-pci device listeners.
Let me explain.
vfio-pci devices depend on the memory
This is preparation work to finally enabled dynamic switching ON/OFF for
VT-d protection. The old VT-d codes is using static IOMMU address space,
and that won't satisfy vfio-pci device listeners.
Let me explain.
vfio-pci devices depend on the memory region listener and IOMMU replay
mechanism to
14 matches
Mail list logo