On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 02:54:43AM -0400, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > Possibly, the question that interest me the most is what interface will > KVM end up using. I'm also not terribly fan with the (perceived) > discrepancy between using uiommu to create groups but using the group fd > to actually do the mappings, at least if that is still the plan. > > If the separate uiommu interface is kept, then anything that wants to be > able to benefit from the ability to put multiple devices (or existing > groups) into such a "meta group" would need to be explicitly modified to > deal with the uiommu APIs. > > I tend to prefer such "meta groups" as being something you create > statically using a configuration interface, either via sysfs, netlink or > ioctl's to a "control" vfio device driven by a simple command line tool > (which can have the configuration stored in /etc and re-apply it at > boot). Hmm, I don't think that these groups are static for the systems run-time. They only exist for the lifetime of a guest per default, at least on x86. Thats why I prefer to do this grouping using VFIO and not some sysfs interface (which would be the third interface beside the ioctls and netlink a VFIO user needs to be aware of). Doing this in the ioctl interface just makes things easier. Joerg -- AMD Operating System Research Center Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24 85609 Dornach General Managers: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd Registration: Dornach, Landkr. Muenchen; Registerger. Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632 -- 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
