From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 261AF24167E for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2025 08:14:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743668048; cv=none; b=o8YGBOztQLob72fZxkzKhUCAbdXJBEnTb4pJi9Z+G010/UcXP88OgFUf7zb5Dv8XQdJvXKMCfhj9nleJnaoV63Xen82tO5pHX4bfKP4u4t8FnRTAF2dg5jz115Ul6bspDaTLlhWpqTXl29rLJIOF+mrxtX5GKriuWXzqNRFoAu0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743668048; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8ljqiGcCt0GZtC0zTI0Y+omskizGFKR2m3xQkFkwDCY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=I1HsCxZc6WH9u2NKQM0HTzeylhoukvzbw1gF9HiyqL2g/yxJBaWlf7ox+yzkrNDZOVxLqLhehRIt8KqOvXEDwk/9Dv+MHSeyx136thfHiydc86VnjvZF3op0LByQcV1l8BiU9VKg3bb946ArdIE+BJM1eGkOry8EWGwz6U3lD9Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=Istdqy2a; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Istdqy2a" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1743668046; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=rzWYYjEiaRBeSb8Vj5o/F0qgZqnmjAeBb2PcLQ2qM0A=; b=Istdqy2aql8pku8BsvYLPuALoApc4nA0hBIruC9aLcKMQHCy1AD6vbKoT2O0EdMEt0ZZfC 43/eNxS+/+3DbkAgN60GF/BqqiY7Gij7hw2u2mbeiUFtiuZ9IJHNDDkLQcRWc0jpOkIQy5 HcbTR9C62TL+dzKYLuDELpwEV/RJEpA= Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com [209.85.221.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-625-QnmTETXWOK2EdnNSzSVGFQ-1; Thu, 03 Apr 2025 04:14:04 -0400 X-MC-Unique: QnmTETXWOK2EdnNSzSVGFQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: QnmTETXWOK2EdnNSzSVGFQ_1743668043 Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39979ad285bso388528f8f.2 for ; Thu, 03 Apr 2025 01:14:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1743668043; x=1744272843; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=rzWYYjEiaRBeSb8Vj5o/F0qgZqnmjAeBb2PcLQ2qM0A=; b=pjED6qovnFOD0EA9fMrW+tIrMS3IdHCIzT4Tw6Xr1cfzSotiu+EQkd2GOVlTjhMjzx AUeCN1Kb2BmerVeajlz8vvGGYwrokMqc1HiDptnkWvtNpSAud4mQVDkkcv25nBDC2lTl V5KYr8eevkp9yG9YLMQBDgZyLW9CxG2h5/iB+gcKP0dR6qXBaqvEoUKJPXlTdaYucTrd 0iLRJCLP7EWQx+31PgsLacPNLdvxjmJIdII2oToap+VV6SkTVQu6Qy9/w0aNmShHMppf uribhwY7n2ztg2SKYzsFvuvwXh/1gprIFYUxOqZBlb81RUWPgPrVavLyPsDtnIjqd61W 4j/A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCX8HTVd98FGgSGlgVN9t92fAyNQdVHzmbonLaj5MbeRZA6I58BkwjHoH5W2oCfYXUwWMYBmTeZMa5Us@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyyo6fC7kZY5uxGvAyLZEHeOoUq+3RzcboNiMTqFGqnp0tiO9UR SGBE5RxwqD4ecoLVTAgFdd4mmvqYx19qjESyvTMb83Wo36cppN53HX/B/jH9OWgqHBthjxjAtSM ZcK7ojM2a06yky0Qy182HRNUeACV5P/qlF9dzjYYPSAeEHwJKmCwhOlaZEW0= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsVqVaEeo+x8tmSwYJ5Xyd104tqEolzP39SCjE3wKCWRzWVqKCPnNp8NrMrQW8 Xkgadjupakn61qbbTj1DAayA7FKEkJtjhuZuWZKsENldr8lnwXN3n3CxlkBmjq2PTabnx8brJEV zFNRPeKzcHKkdlecn1XIKhiw2gYPxCkNCjIYe46QyMMt8L3BTmfE62f/fhvtucnhTEY4/2KhVN1 TqDjRc7tnh/LjmHMaAPXIzg74yQZFOvPDUT1+7JZdnZY/fFXlHtMzO9e9k3mpj545tmyAoDYWL9 JUaL1IE4Tw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1788:b0:399:7f43:b3a4 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39c120e088cmr16478329f8f.24.1743668043525; Thu, 03 Apr 2025 01:14:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFCqc+UbMw4reOC94Om0ACCo9roOZqNjIluH63XAEl0e6Z4bIUmGEN7/qCnuIYAa0IiNtTjgg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1788:b0:399:7f43:b3a4 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39c120e088cmr16478308f8f.24.1743668043180; Thu, 03 Apr 2025 01:14:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com ([2a0d:6fc0:1517:1000:ea83:8e5f:3302:3575]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-39c301b9d55sm1070866f8f.42.2025.04.03.01.14.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 03 Apr 2025 01:14:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2025 04:13:59 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: David Woodhouse Cc: Zhu Lingshan , virtio-comment@lists.linux.dev, hch@infradead.org, Claire Chang , linux-devicetree , Rob Herring , =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg?= Roedel , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, graf@amazon.de Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] content: Add VIRTIO_F_SWIOTLB to negotiate use of SWIOTLB bounce buffers Message-ID: <20250403040643-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20250402112410.2086892-1-dwmw2@infradead.org> <20250402112410.2086892-2-dwmw2@infradead.org> <1966cbf1-a430-480e-a78d-3d6bbcb4ada4@amd.com> <20250403033230-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <59be937432fe73b5781ecb04aad501ae5a11be23.camel@infradead.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <59be937432fe73b5781ecb04aad501ae5a11be23.camel@infradead.org> On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 08:54:45AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Thu, 2025-04-03 at 03:34 -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > Indeed I personally do not exactly get why implement a virtual system > > without an IOMMU when virtio-iommu is available. > > > > I have a feeling it's about lack of windows drivers for virtio-iommu > > at this point. > > And a pKVM (etc.) implementation of virtio-iommu which would allow the > *trusted* part of the hypervisor to know which guest memory should be > shared with the VMM implementing the virtio device models? Is there a blocker here? > You'd also end up in a situation where you have a virtio-iommu for some > devices, and a real two-stage IOMMU (e.g. SMMU or AMD's vIOMMU) for > other devices. Are guest operating systems going to cope well with > that? They should. In particular because systems with multiple IOMMUs already exist. > Do the available discovery mechanisms for all the relevant IOMMUs > even *allow* for that to be expressed? I think yes. But, it's been a while since I played with this, let me check what works, what does not, and get back to you on this. -- MST