From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: virtio-dev-return-7806-cohuck=redhat.com@lists.oasis-open.org Sender: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Received: from lists.oasis-open.org (oasis-open.org [10.110.1.242]) by lists.oasis-open.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A92D9985D89 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:30:14 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 12:29:53 +0200 From: Jean-Philippe Brucker Message-ID: <20200924102953.GD170808@myrica> References: <20200821131540.2801801-1-jean-philippe@linaro.org> <20200924045958-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20200924092129.GH27174@8bytes.org> <20200924053159-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20200924100255.GM27174@8bytes.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200924100255.GM27174@8bytes.org> Subject: [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Add virtio-iommu built-in topology Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline To: Joerg Roedel Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Auger Eric , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, jasowang@redhat.com, kevin.tian@intel.com, sebastien.boeuf@intel.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com List-ID: On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:02:55PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 05:38:13AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 11:21:29AM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: > > > 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: > > > > I am not sure it's a must. > > It is, having only one parser for the ACPI and MMIO descriptions was one > of the selling points for MMIO in past discussions and I think it makes > sense to keep them in sync. It's not possible to use exactly the same code for parsing. The access methods are different (need to deal with port-IO for built-in description on PCI, for example) and more importantly, the structure is different as well. The ACPI table needs nodes for virtio-iommu while the built-in description is contained in the virtio-iommu itself. So the endpoint nodes point to virtio-iommu node on ACPI, while they don't need a pointer on the built-in desc. I kept as much as possible common in structures and implementation, but in the end we still need about 200 unique lines on each side. Thanks, Jean > > > We can always tweak the parser if there are slight differences > > between ACPI and virtio formats. > > There is no guarantee that there only need to be "tweaks" until the > ACPI table format is stablized. > > Regards, > > Joerg > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org