Re: [PATCH 0/1] uio_pci_generic: extensions to allow access for non-privileged processes

[Tom Lyon <pugs@lyon-about.com>]

On Friday 09 April 2010 02:58:19 am Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 04/02/2010 08:05 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> >> Currently kvm does device assignment with its own code, I'd like to unify
> >> it with uio, not split it off.
> >>
> >> Separate notifications for msi-x interrupts are just as useful for uio as
> >> they are for kvm.
> >>      
> > I agree, there should not be a difference here for KVM vs. the "normal"
> > version.
> >    
> 
> Just so you know what you got into, here are the kvm requirements:
> 
> - msi interrupts delivered via eventfd (these allow us to inject 
> interrupts from uio to a guest without going through userspace)
Check.
> - nonlinear iommu mapping (i.e. map discontiguous ranges of the device 
> address space into ranges of the virtual address space)
Check.
> - dynamic iommu mapping (support guest memory hotplug)
Check.
> - unprivileged operation once an admin has assigned a device (my 
> preferred implementation is to have all operations go through an fd, 
> which can be passed via SCM_RIGHTS from a privileged application that 
> opens the file)
Check.
> - access to all config space, but BARs must be translated so userspace 
> cannot attack the host
Please elaborate. All of PCI config? All of PCIe config? Seems like a huge mess.
> - some mechanism which allows us to affine device interrupts with their 
> target vcpus (eventually, this is vague)
Do-able.
> - anything mst might add
mst?
> - a pony
Rainbow or glitter?

The 'check' items are already done, not fully tested; probably available next week.
Can we leave the others for future patches? Please? And I definitely need help with 
the PCI config stuff.