lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [RFC v2] /dev/iommu uAPI proposal
Date
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 7:03 AM
>
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 10:48:38PM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>
> > We can still bind to the parent with cookie, but with
> > iommu_register_ sw_device() IOMMU fd knows that this binding doesn't
> > need to establish any security context via IOMMU API.
>
> AFAIK there is no reason to involve the parent PCI or other device in
> SW mode. The iommufd doesn't need to be aware of anything there.
>

Yes. but does it makes sense to have an unified model in IOMMU fd
which always have a [struct device, cookie] with flags to indicate whether
the binding/attaching should be specially handled for sw mdev? Or
are you suggesting that lacking of struct device is actually the indicator
for such trick?

Thanks
Kevin

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-14 01:20    [W:0.597 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site