From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Vrabel Subject: Re: Xen PV IOMMU interface draft C Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 16:24:32 +0100 Message-ID: <55916330.30506@citrix.com> References: <557B0C35.4080907@citrix.com> <558D280B.3050806@citrix.com> <1435316624.32500.165.camel@citrix.com> <20150629144058.GB24629@l.oracle.com> <1435589566.32500.343.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Z9avJ-0007yd-CC for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2015 15:24:41 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1435589566.32500.343.camel@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: Kevin Tian , "Zhang, Yu C" , Stefano Stabellini , Andrew Cooper , Julien Grall , Paul Durrant , "Lv, Zhiyuan" , Jan Beulich , xen-devel , Malcolm Crossley List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 29/06/15 15:52, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Mon, 2015-06-29 at 10:40 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:03:44PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: >>> +ARM devs. >>> >>> On Fri, 2015-06-26 at 11:23 +0100, Malcolm Crossley wrote: >>>> Hi All, >>> >>> I had a chat with Malcolm about this with respect to ARM. >>> >>> The upshot is that this does not help us to remove the dom0 1:1 >>> workaround or associated swiotlb uses on systems without an SMMU, nor >>> does it allow us to sensibly do passthrough on systems which lack an >>> SMMU. >> >> What would? > > This "Xen PV IOMMU interface". I guess Konrad is asking if this PV IOMMU interface doesn't solve these problems, what (other possible interface) would? I guess the answer is a SMMU? David