On Friday 09 April 2010 02:58:19 am Avi Kivity wrote: > On 04/02/2010 08:05 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > > >> Currently kvm does device assignment with its own code, I'd like to unify > >> it with uio, not split it off. > >> > >> Separate notifications for msi-x interrupts are just as useful for uio as > >> they are for kvm. > >> > > I agree, there should not be a difference here for KVM vs. the "normal" > > version. > > > > Just so you know what you got into, here are the kvm requirements: > > - msi interrupts delivered via eventfd (these allow us to inject > interrupts from uio to a guest without going through userspace) Check. > - nonlinear iommu mapping (i.e. map discontiguous ranges of the device > address space into ranges of the virtual address space) Check. > - dynamic iommu mapping (support guest memory hotplug) Check. > - unprivileged operation once an admin has assigned a device (my > preferred implementation is to have all operations go through an fd, > which can be passed via SCM_RIGHTS from a privileged application that > opens the file) Check. > - access to all config space, but BARs must be translated so userspace > cannot attack the host Please elaborate. All of PCI config? All of PCIe config? Seems like a huge mess. > - some mechanism which allows us to affine device interrupts with their > target vcpus (eventually, this is vague) Do-able. > - anything mst might add mst? > - a pony Rainbow or glitter? The 'check' items are already done, not fully tested; probably available next week. Can we leave the others for future patches? Please? And I definitely need help with the PCI config stuff. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
