On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 09:37:20PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > Greg KH wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 02:44:06PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: >> >>> Greg KH wrote: >>> >>>> It's that "second" part that I'm worried about. How is that going to >>>> happen? Do you have any patches that show this kind of "assignment"? >>>> >>>> >>> For kvm, this is in 2.6.28-rc. >>> >> >> Where? I just looked and couldn't find anything, but odds are I was >> looking in the wrong place :( >> >> > > arch/x86/kvm/vtd.c: iommu integration (allows assigning the device's memory > resources) That file is not in 2.6.28-rc4 :( > virt/kvm/irq*: interrupt redirection (allows assigning the device's > interrupt resources) I only see virt/kvm/irq_comm.c in 2.6.28-rc4. > the rest (pci config space, pio redirection) are in userspace. So you don't need these pci core changes at all? >>> Note there are two ways to assign a device to a guest: >>> >>> - run the VF driver in the guest: this has the advantage of best >>> performance, but requires pinning all guest memory, makes live migration >>> a tricky proposition, and ties the guest to the underlying hardware. >> >> Is this what you would prefer for kvm? >> > > It's not my personal preference, but it is a supported configuration. For > some use cases it is the only one that makes sense. > > Again, VF-in-guest and VF-in-host both have their places. And since Linux > can be both guest and host, it's best if the VF driver knows nothing about > SR-IOV; it's just a pci driver. The PF driver should emulate anything that > SR-IOV does not provide (like missing pci config space). Yes, we need both. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
