On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:20:34AM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: > Yes, at the moment it's difficult to guess what device drivers will > want, but I can imagine some driver offering SVA to userspace, while > keeping a few PASIDs for themselves to map kernel memory. Or create mdev > devices for virtualization while also allowing bare-metal SVA. So I > think we should aim at enabling these use-cases in parallel, even if it > doesn't necessarily need to be possible right now. Yeah okay, but allowing these use-cases in parallel basically disallows giving any guest control over a device's pasid-table, no? I am just asking because I want to make up my mind about the necessary extensions to the IOMMU-API. Regards, Joerg
