lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [v1 1/2] xen/p2m: Create identity mappings for PFNs beyound E820 and PCI BARs
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 02:55:13PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 29.10.13 at 15:45, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 08:23:30AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 28.10.13 at 17:58, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 04:08:19PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >> >> If you can look at PCI host bridge apertures instead of BARs, that
> >> >> would solve both problems. Reassigning those apertures is
> >> >> theoretically possible but is not even a gleam in our eyes yet.
> >> >
> >> > <nods> I think I have to have both (BARs and host bridge apertures) as when
> >> > we do PCI passthrough to a guest - we might do it without a bridge.
> >>
> >> Why? Aren't the host bridge ranges necessarily a superset of the
> >> individual devices' BARs?
> >
> > Yes. But when you pass in a PCI device to a PV guest you don't pass in the
> > bridge. Just the PCI device itself.
>
> Right you are. Which means that basing the whole logic on the
> PCI device BARs is likely wrong anyway, not just because it
> doesn't account for other MMIO ranges.

Right, but that is OK. When you pass in a PCI device to a PV guest you
only care about that specific device driver being able to access its BARs.

>
> Jan
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-29 16:41    [W:0.075 / U:4.972 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site