Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933730AbcKJOkL (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2016 09:40:11 -0500 Received: from 8bytes.org ([81.169.241.247]:59863 "EHLO theia.8bytes.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933541AbcKJOkK (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2016 09:40:10 -0500 Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 15:40:07 +0100 From: Joerg Roedel To: Alex Williamson Cc: Christoffer Dall , Don Dutile , Will Deacon , Eric Auger , eric.auger.pro@gmail.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, robin.murphy@arm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, jason@lakedaemon.net, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, drjones@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pranav.sawargaonkar@gmail.com, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, punit.agrawal@arm.com, diana.craciun@nxp.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org, arnd@arndb.de, jcm@redhat.com, dwmw@amazon.co.uk Subject: Re: Summary of LPC guest MSI discussion in Santa Fe Message-ID: <20161110144007.GC2078@8bytes.org> References: <1478209178-3009-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@redhat.com> <20161103220205.37715b49@t450s.home> <20161108024559.GA20591@arm.com> <20161108202922.GC15676@cbox> <20161108163508.1bcae0c2@t450s.home> <58228F71.6020108@redhat.com> <20161109170326.GG17771@arm.com> <582371FB.2040808@redhat.com> <20161109192303.GD15676@cbox> <20161109130114.3e17bba9@t450s.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161109130114.3e17bba9@t450s.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1069 Lines: 20 On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 01:01:14PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote: > Well, it's not like QEMU or libvirt stumbling through sysfs to figure > out where holes could be in order to instantiate a VM with matching > holes, just in case someone might decide to hot-add a device into the > VM, at some point, and hopefully they don't migrate the VM to another > host with a different layout first, is all that much less disgusting or > foolproof. It's just that in order to dynamically remove a page as a > possible DMA target we require a paravirt channel, such as a balloon > driver that's able to pluck a specific page. In some ways it's > actually less disgusting, but it puts some prerequisites on > enlightening the guest OS. Thanks, I think it is much simpler if libvirt/qemu just go through all potentially assignable devices on a system and pre-exclude any addresses from guest RAM beforehand, rather than doing something like this with paravirt/ballooning when a device is hot-added. There is no guarantee that you can take a page away from a linux-guest. Joerg