[lkml]   [2021]   [Jun]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal

在 2021/6/10 下午7:47, Jason Gunthorpe 写道:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 10:00:01AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> 在 2021/6/8 下午9:20, Jason Gunthorpe 写道:
>>> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 09:10:42AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> Well, this sounds like a re-invention of io_uring which has already worked
>>>> for multifds.
>>> How so? io_uring is about sending work to the kernel, not getting
>>> structued events back?
>> Actually it can. Userspace can poll multiple fds via preparing multiple sqes
>> with IORING_OP_ADD flag.
> Poll is only a part of what is needed here, the main issue is
> transfering the PRI events to userspace quickly.

Do we really care e.g at most one more syscall in this case? I think the
time spent on demand paging is much more than transferring #PF to
userspace. What's more, a well designed vIOMMU capable IOMMU hardware
should have the ability to inject such event directly to guest if #PF
happens on L1.

>> This means another ring and we need introduce ioctl() to add or remove
>> ioasids from the poll. And it still need a kind of fallback like a list if
>> the ring is full.
> The max size of the ring should be determinable based on the PRI
> concurrance of each device and the number of devices sharing the ring

This has at least one assumption, #PF event is the only event for the
ring, I'm not sure this is the case.


> In any event, I'm not entirely convinced eliding the PRI user/kernel
> copy is the main issue here.. If we want this to be low latency I
> think it ends up with some kernel driver component assisting the
> vIOMMU emulation and avoiding the round trip to userspace
> Jason

 \ /
  Last update: 2021-06-11 07:45    [W:0.135 / U:4.676 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site