Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 Dec 2011 22:12:45 -0800 | Subject | Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Device isolation infrastructure v2 | From | Aaron Fabbri <> |
| |
On 12/20/11 8:30 PM, "Alex Williamson" <alex.williamson@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-12-21 at 14:32 +1100, David Gibson wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 04:41:56PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote: >>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:11:25AM +1100, David Gibson wrote: <snip> >>> >>> Well, the iommu-api was designed for amd-vi and vt-d. But its concepts >>> turn out to be more general and by no way x86-centric anymore. >> >> It's improving, but there are still plenty of x86isms there. > > Having worked on ia64 for a while, it's interesting to see this x86 > bashing from the other side. Everyone is more than willing to make > architecture neutral interfaces (jeez, look at the extent of the vfio > reworks), but it's not fair to throw away interfaces as x86-centric if > you're not pushing your requirements and making use of the code. > > It seems like we'd be better served today to start with the vfio code we > have and let that be the catalyst to drive an iommu api that better > serves non-x86. I don't see how this group management tangent is really > getting us anywhere. Thanks,
I'd agree that incremental approach here is key. VFIO has already seen a ton of rework to accommodate all architectures. Let's not bite off a bunch of these other subsystem rewrites in the same chunk as our VFIO effort.
-Aaron
| |