From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42212)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <B07421@freescale.com>) id 1UOEwx-00031L-H2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 18:17:37 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <B07421@freescale.com>) id 1UOEwt-00072m-Rs
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 18:17:35 -0400
Received: from co9ehsobe003.messaging.microsoft.com ([207.46.163.26]:31149
	helo=co9outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <B07421@freescale.com>) id 1UOEwt-00072U-JR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 18:17:31 -0400
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 17:17:25 -0500
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
In-Reply-To: <9F6FE96B71CF29479FF1CDC8046E15035A29FB@039-SN1MPN1-003.039d.mgd.msft.net>
	(from B08248@freescale.com on Thu Apr  4 17:10:27 2013)
Message-ID: <1365200245.17535.13@snotra>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; delsp=Yes; format=Flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: vfio API changes needed for powerpc (v3)
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Yoder Stuart-B08248 <B08248@freescale.com>
Cc: Wood Scott-B07421 <B07421@freescale.com>, "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, "agraf@suse.de" <agraf@suse.de>, "iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>, Bhushan Bharat-R65777 <R65777@freescale.com>, Sethi Varun-B16395 <B16395@freescale.com>

On 04/04/2013 05:10:27 PM, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
> /*
>  * VFIO_IOMMU_PAMU_UNMAP_MSI_BANK
>  *
>  * Unmaps the MSI bank at the specified iova.
>  * Caller provides struct vfio_pamu_msi_bank_unmap with all fields =20
> set.
>  * Operates on VFIO file descriptor (/dev/vfio/vfio).
>  * Return: 0 on success, -errno on failure
>  */
>=20
> struct vfio_pamu_msi_bank_unmap {
>         __u32   argsz;
>         __u32   flags;     /* no flags currently */
>         __u64   iova;      /* the iova to be unmapped to */
> };
> #define VFIO_IOMMU_PAMU_UNMAP_MSI_BANK  _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + x,
>         struct vfio_pamu_msi_bank_unmap )

What happens if a normal unmap call is done on the MSI iova?  Do we =20
need a separate unmap?

-Scott=