On Thu, 18 May 2023 12:23:29 +0000 "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2023 2:21 AM > > > > On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 11:26:09AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > > > It's not clear to me why we need a separate iommufd_access for > > > noiommu. > > > > The point was to allocate an ID for the device so we can use that ID > > with the other interfaces in all cases. > > I guess Alex's question is why adding a new pointer named noiommu_access > while there is already the iommufd_access pointer named iommufd_access. Yes, precisely. Sorry that was confusing, we need the access for noiommu but it's not clear why that access needs to be stored in a separate pointer when we can already differentiate noiommu devices otherwise. Thanks, Alex
