lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCHv5 3/3] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:00:21PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>> FWIW: VBUS handles this situation via the "memctx" abstraction. IOW,
>> the memory is not assumed to be a userspace address. Rather, it is a
>> memctx-specific address, which can be userspace, or any other type
>> (including hardware, dma-engine, etc). As long as the memctx knows how
>> to translate it, it will work.
>
> How would permissions be handled?

Same as anything else, really. Read on for details.

> it's easy to allow an app to pass in virtual addresses in its own address space.

Agreed, and this is what I do.

The guest always passes its own physical addresses (using things like
__pa() in linux). This address passed is memctx specific, but generally
would fall into the category of "virtual-addresses" from the hosts
perspective.

For a KVM/AlacrityVM guest example, the addresses are GPAs, accessed
internally to the context via a gfn_to_hva conversion (you can see this
occuring in the citation links I sent)

For Ira's example, the addresses would represent a physical address on
the PCI boards, and would follow any kind of relevant rules for
converting a "GPA" to a host accessible address (even if indirectly, via
a dma controller).


> But we can't let the guest specify physical addresses.

Agreed. Neither your proposal nor mine operate this way afaict.

HTH

Kind Regards,
-Greg

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-14 18:11    [W:0.288 / U:0.320 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site