From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751113AbdHRGu3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2017 02:50:29 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40048 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750881AbdHRGu2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2017 02:50:28 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 2A92C5D68B Authentication-Results: ext-mx10.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx10.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=eric.auger@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC v2 2/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add tlbi_on_map option To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" References: <1502459130-6234-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@redhat.com> <1502459130-6234-3-git-send-email-eric.auger@redhat.com> <20170817163424.GC30719@arm.com> <20170818055031-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Cc: Will Deacon , eric.auger.pro@gmail.com, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com, Jean-Philippe.Brucker@arm.com, christoffer.dall@linaro.org, Marc.Zyngier@arm.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com, tn@semihalf.com, bharat.bhushan@nxp.com From: Auger Eric Message-ID: <703a5dec-d1e6-f9cb-eab2-e4fcf8d20665@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 08:50:18 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170818055031-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.39]); Fri, 18 Aug 2017 06:50:28 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Michael, On 18/08/2017 04:54, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 07:47:04PM +0200, Auger Eric wrote: >> I will see with Peter and other potential users in the community whether >> it is worth to pursue the efforts on upstreaming the QEMU vSMMUv3 >> device, considering the VFIO/VHOST integration is made impossible. > > I posted more ideas on finding a way to support it after all separately. > Even without this: > 1. VHOST does not need to be notified on map. My mistake. I will split the QEMU series accordingly. > 2. VFIO might be possible for hardware that supports nested page tables. > > IMHO 2 is worth looking into. OK That's my next step. Thank you for your suggestions. Eric >