On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 04:55:57PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 12:51:46PM -0700, Raj, Ashok wrote: > > I think we agreed (or agree to disagree and commit) for device types that > > we have for SIOV, VFIO based approach works well without having to re-invent > > another way to do the same things. Not looking for a shortcut by any means, > > but we need to plan around existing hardware though. Looks like vDPA took > > some shortcuts then to not abstract iommu uAPI instead :-)? When all > > necessary hardware was available.. This would be a solved puzzle. > > I think it is the opposite, vIOMMU and related has outgrown VFIO as > the "home" and needs to stand alone. > > Apparently the HW that will need PASID for vDPA is Intel HW, so if So just to make this clear, I did check internally if there are any plans for vDPA + SVM. There are none at the moment. It seems like you have better insight into our plans ;-). Please do let me know who confirmed vDPA roadmap with you and I would love to talk to them to clear the air. Cheers, Ashok
