From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Vlad Zolotarov <vladz@cloudius-systems.com>
Subject: Re: Having troubles binding an SR-IOV VF to
 uio_pci_generic on Amazon instance
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 23:09:33 +0300
Message-ID: <560C417D.1050409@cloudius-systems.com>
References: <20150930143927-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
 <560BCD2F.5060505@cloudius-systems.com>
 <20150930150115-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
 <560BD284.7040505@cloudius-systems.com>
 <20150930151632-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
 <560BDA81.6070807@cloudius-systems.com>
 <20150930182155-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
 <560C26DC.80209@cloudius-systems.com>
 <20150930215027-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
 <560C32CC.90708@cloudius-systems.com>
 <20150930222910-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com
 [209.85.212.169]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4753A6A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:09:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wicfx3 with SMTP id fx3so3309009wic.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:09:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150930222910-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>



On 09/30/15 22:39, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:06:52PM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
>>>> How would iommu
>>>> virtualization change anything?
>>> Kernel can use an iommu to limit device access to memory of
>>> the controlling application.
>> Ok, this is obvious but what it has to do with enabling using MSI/MSI-X
>> interrupts support in uio_pci_generic? kernel may continue to limit the
>> above access with this support as well.
> It could maybe. So if you write a patch to allow MSI by at the same time
> creating an isolated IOMMU group and blocking DMA from device in
> question anywhere, that sounds reasonable.

No, I'm only planning to add MSI and MSI-X interrupts support for 
uio_pci_generic device.
The rest mentioned above should naturally be a matter of a different 
patch and writing it is orthogonal to the patch I'm working on as has 
been extensively discussed in this thread.

>