Messages in this thread | | | From | Paolo Bonzini <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal | Date | Wed, 9 Jun 2021 15:24:11 +0200 |
| |
On 09/06/21 14:47, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 02:46:05PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 09/06/21 13:57, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 02:49:32AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: >>> >>>> Last unclosed open. Jason, you dislike symbol_get in this contract per >>>> earlier comment. As Alex explained, looks it's more about module >>>> dependency which is orthogonal to how this contract is designed. What >>>> is your opinion now? >>> >>> Generally when you see symbol_get like this it suggests something is >>> wrong in the layering.. >>> >>> Why shouldn't kvm have a normal module dependency on drivers/iommu? >> >> It allows KVM to load even if there's an "install /bin/false" for vfio >> (typically used together with the blacklist directive) in modprobe.conf. >> This rationale should apply to iommu as well. > > I can vaugely understand this rational for vfio, but not at all for > the platform's iommu driver, sorry.
Sorry, should apply to ioasid, not iommu (assuming that /dev/ioasid support would be modular).
Paolo
| |