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=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, 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 85076C46466 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (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 E134220782 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="SpKgjpNo" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E134220782 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59C9484828; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rnav3fFSu9Um; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.linuxfoundation.org (lf-lists.osuosl.org [140.211.9.56]) by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E6BA841E6; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lf-lists.osuosl.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34328C016F; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5E53C0051 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9957983B47 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:46 +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 vkcJ1RTpKzxu for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:45 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [63.128.21.124]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E92C82383 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1601997824; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ySCeSs2lHG0zJMFNUJWe/o+SED3rw+cfxJDttvVzqbI=; b=SpKgjpNoIQ7EuKHbOM7w8AoLNVFbXpUvzHqrUIPMyCoQm60/t4bzexkeCDU0N/UlnyHlcK be+y4MkgNwlv8+448cu+CMuK2SJMR8IOxmpI1pal7j3vc1UhAKHiJAgtvLkidUexHnUBKE 90zlOIeD92NVOYvEwEeQ103fR7zSia8= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-508-jh5Gf5HfOXm18dGTE45rhg-1; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 11:23:42 -0400 X-MC-Unique: jh5Gf5HfOXm18dGTE45rhg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BF8B9CC07; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.113.210] (ovpn-113-210.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.210]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F13660BFA; Tue, 6 Oct 2020 15:23:33 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Add virtio-iommu built-in topology To: Al Stone 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> <20201002182348.GO138842@redhat.com> From: Auger Eric Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 17:23:32 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201002182348.GO138842@redhat.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 Cc: Jean-Philippe Brucker , lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Joerg Roedel , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, sebastien.boeuf@intel.com, bhelgaas@google.com X-BeenThere: virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux virtualization List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Sender: "Virtualization" Hello Al, On 10/2/20 8:23 PM, Al Stone wrote: > On 24 Sep 2020 11:54, Auger Eric wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Adding Al in the loop >> >> On 9/24/20 11:38 AM, 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. >>> We can always tweak the parser if there are slight differences >>> between ACPI and virtio formats. >>> >>> But we do want the virtio format used here to be approved by the virtio >>> TC, so it won't change. >>> >>> Eric, Jean-Philippe, does one of you intend to create a github issue >>> and request a ballot for the TC? It's been posted end of August with no >>> changes ... >> Jean-Philippe, would you? >>> >>>> 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. >>>> >> >> Al, do you have any news about the the VIOT definition submission to >> the UEFI ASWG? >> >> Thank you in advance >> >> Best Regards >> >> Eric > > A follow-up to my earlier post .... > > Hearing no objection, I've submitted the VIOT table description to > the ASWG for consideration under what they call the "code first" > process. The "first reading" -- a brief discussion on what the > table is and why we would like to add it -- was held yesterday. > No concerns have been raised as yet. Given the discussions that > have already occurred, I don't expect any, either. I have been > wrong at least once before, however. > > At this point, ASWG will revisit the request to add VIOT each > week. If there have been no comments in the prior week, and no > further discussion during the meeting, then a vote will be taken. > Otherwise, there will be discussion and we try again the next > week. > > The ASWG was also told that the likelihood of this definition of > the table changing is pretty low, and that it has been thought out > pretty well already. ASWG's consideration will therefore start > from the assumption that it would be best _not_ to make changes. > > So, I'll let you know what happens next week. Thank you very much for the updates and for your support backing the proposal in the best delays. Best Regards Eric > >> >>> >>> Not that I know, but I don't see why it's a must. >>> >>>> 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 >>> >> > _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization