From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3rPkPp1g8WzDqFm for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 19:57:34 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.11/8.16.0.11) with SMTP id u589rfIM029106 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 05:57:32 -0400 Received: from e23smtp02.au.ibm.com (e23smtp02.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.144]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 23e9m3p0ae-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 08 Jun 2016 05:57:32 -0400 Received: from localhost by e23smtp02.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 19:57:29 +1000 Received: from d23relay08.au.ibm.com (d23relay08.au.ibm.com [9.185.71.33]) by d23dlp01.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AA772CE8056 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 19:57:02 +1000 (EST) Received: from d23av05.au.ibm.com (d23av05.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.119]) by d23relay08.au.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id u589upZ68782054 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 19:56:51 +1000 Received: from d23av05.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av05.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id u589udXW010887 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 19:56:41 +1000 Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 0/6] vfio-pci: Add support for mmapping MSI-X table To: Auger Eric , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org References: <1464847803-22756-1-git-send-email-xyjxie@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: alex.williamson@redhat.com, bhelgaas@google.com, aik@ozlabs.ru, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, joro@8bytes.org, warrier@linux.vnet.ibm.com, zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com, nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com, eric.auger@linaro.org, will.deacon@arm.com, gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com, alistair@popple.id.au, ruscur@russell.cc, kevin.tian@intel.com, David.Laight@ACULAB.COM From: Yongji Xie Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 17:56:49 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Message-Id: <8ccf0165-da3e-9709-6cf2-ccab82eb55fb@linux.vnet.ibm.com> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, Eric On 2016/6/8 15:41, Auger Eric wrote: > Hi Yongji, > > Le 02/06/2016 à 08:09, Yongji Xie a écrit : >> Current vfio-pci implementation disallows to mmap the page >> containing MSI-X table in case that users can write directly >> to MSI-X table and generate an incorrect MSIs. >> >> However, this will cause some performance issue when there >> are some critical device registers in the same page as the >> MSI-X table. We have to handle the mmio access to these >> registers in QEMU emulation rather than in guest. >> >> To solve this issue, this series allows to expose MSI-X table >> to userspace when hardware enables the capability of interrupt >> remapping which can ensure that a given PCI device can only >> shoot the MSIs assigned for it. And we introduce a new bus_flags >> PCI_BUS_FLAGS_MSI_REMAP to test this capability on PCI side >> for different archs. >> >> The patch 3 are based on the proposed patchset[1]. > You may have noticed I sent a respin of [1] yesterday: > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2455187. > > Unfortunately you will see I removed the patch defining the new > msi_domain_info MSI_FLAG_IRQ_REMAPPING flag you rely on in this series. > I did so because I was not using it anymore. At the beginning this was > used to detect whether the MSI assignment was safe but this > method was covering cases where the MSI controller was > upstream to the IOMMU. So now I rely on a mechanism where MSI controller > are supposed to register their MSI doorbells and tag whether it is safe. > > I don't know yet how this change will be welcomed though. Depending > on reviews/discussions, might happen we revert to the previous flag. > > If you need the feature you can embed the used patches in your series and > follow the review process separately. Sorry for the setback. Thanks for your notification. I'd better wait until your patches get settled. Then I could exactly know which way we should use to test the capability of interrupt remapping on ARM in my series. Thanks, Yongji