From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: peter.maydell@linaro.org (Peter Maydell)
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 10:21:48 +0000
Subject: [PATCH v1 01/16] virtio: Validate queue pfn for 32bit transports
In-Reply-To: <2aacb81b-0efb-87b9-f70c-a61e66dd0331@arm.com>
References: <20180109190414.4017-1-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
 <20180109190414.4017-2-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
 <20180110012429-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <f53478fc-c0c1-7502-1b8c-c23e332cae9c@arm.com>
 <20180110130230-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <CAFEAcA9VJ41vPBOwYSVHmBGtjdA4jL2b2mHAUZ09aym_JynMzw@mail.gmail.com>
 <2aacb81b-0efb-87b9-f70c-a61e66dd0331@arm.com>
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA9KMWkTOd4w-QD8fsFs4UQJaNC4PMwPtHVS54ZLhHT72A@mail.gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 10 January 2018 at 11:25, Jean-Philippe Brucker
<jean-philippe.brucker@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On 10/01/18 11:19, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Are there uses that make it worthwhile to get virtio-1
>> support added to virtio-mmio, rather than just getting
>> people to move over to virtio-pci instead ?
>
> virtio-iommu uses virtio-mmio transport. It makes little sense to have an
> IOMMU presented as a PCI endpoint.

Having an entire transport just for the IOMMU doesn't make
a great deal of sense either though :-) If we didn't already
have virtio-mmio kicking around would we really have designed
it that way?

thanks
-- PMM