From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4D9DC2D0E2 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:21:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C268212CC for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:21:38 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4C268212CC Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=8bytes.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F151286B3B; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:21:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EF5OO65hUFxT; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:21:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.linuxfoundation.org (lf-lists.osuosl.org [140.211.9.56]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EAD086B9D; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:21:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lf-lists.osuosl.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 070A8C1AD6; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:21:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from silver.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42B6BC0051; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:21:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 268FF20467; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:21:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from silver.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BhpL0hEc93by; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:21:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from theia.8bytes.org (8bytes.org [81.169.241.247]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 484312045D; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:21:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by theia.8bytes.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DB01A295; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 11:21:30 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 11:21:29 +0200 From: Joerg Roedel To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Add virtio-iommu built-in topology Message-ID: <20200924092129.GH27174@8bytes.org> References: <20200821131540.2801801-1-jean-philippe@linaro.org> <20200924045958-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200924045958-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Cc: virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, kevin.tian@intel.com, Jean-Philippe Brucker , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, jasowang@redhat.com, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, sebastien.boeuf@intel.com, bhelgaas@google.com X-BeenThere: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues for Linux IOMMU support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Sender: "iommu" On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 05:00:35AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > OK so this looks good. Can you pls repost with the minor tweak > suggested and all acks included, and I will queue this? My NACK still stands, as long as a few questions are open: 1) The format used here will be the same as in the ACPI table? I think the answer to this questions must be Yes, so this leads to the real question: 2) Has the ACPI table format stabalized already? If and only if the answer is Yes I will Ack these patches. We don't need to wait until the ACPI table format is published in a specification update, but at least some certainty that it will not change in incompatible ways anymore is needed. So what progress has been made with the ACPI table specification, is it just a matter of time to get it approved or are there concerns? Regards, Joerg _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu