On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 03:24:23PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Sun, Jun 02, 2024 at 08:25:34PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote: > > > > I understand the appeal of doing this has been to minimize qemu > > > changes in its ACPI parts if we tackle that instead maybe we should > > > just not implement viommu to multiple piommu. It is somewhat > > > complicated. > > > > Would you please clarify that suggestion "not implement viommu > > to multiple piommu"? > > > > For regular nesting (SMMU), we are still doing one vSMMU in the > > VMM, though VCMDQ case would be an exception.... > > This is what I mean, always do multiple vSMMU if there are multiple > physical pSMMUs. Don't replicate any virtual commands across pSMMUs. Thanks for clarifying. That also means you'd prefer putting the command dispatcher in VMM, which is what we have at this moment. Nicolin
