On 27/06/18 20:59, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> Another reason to keep the MMIO transport option is that one
>> virtio-iommu can manage DMA from endpoints on multiple PCI domains at
>> the same time, as well as platform devices. Some VMMs might want that,
>> in which case the IOMMU would be a separ
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 07:04:46PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On 26/06/18 19:07, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > So as I pointed out new virtio 0 device isn't really welcome ;)
>
> Agreed, virtio-iommu is expected to be implemented on virtio 1 and
> later. I'll remove the two legacy-relat
On 26/06/18 19:07, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> So as I pointed out new virtio 0 device isn't really welcome ;)
Agreed, virtio-iommu is expected to be implemented on virtio 1 and
later. I'll remove the two legacy-related paragraph from the spec and
add a check in the driver as you suggested, to avo
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 08:06:50PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> Implement the base virtio-iommu driver, following version 0.7 of the
> specification [1].
>
> Changes since last version [2]:
> * Address comments, thanks again for the review.
> * As suggested, add a DT binding description i
