Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 17 Aug 2022 14:48:22 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc:     stefanha@redhat.com, jasowang@redhat.com,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org, ascull@google.com, maz@kernel.org,
        keirf@google.com, jiyong@google.com, kernel-team@android.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        crosvm-dev@chromium.org
Subject: Re: IOTLB support for vhost/vsock breaks crosvm on Android
Message-ID: <20220817134821.GA12615@willie-the-truck>
References: <20220805181105.GA29848@willie-the-truck>
 <20220807042408-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <20220808101850.GA31984@willie-the-truck>
 <20220808083958-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220808083958-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 08:45:48AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > Also yes, I think it's a good idea to change crosvm anyway.  While the
> > > work around I describe might make sense upstream I don't think it's a
> > > reasonable thing to do in stable kernels.
> > > I think I'll prepare a patch documenting the legal vhost features
> > > as a 1st step even though crosvm is rust so it's not importing
> > > the header directly, right?
> > 
> > Documentation is a good idea regardless, so thanks for that. Even though
> > crosvm has its own bindings for the vhost ioctl()s, the documentation
> > can be reference or duplicated once it's available in the kernel headers.
> > 
> So for crosvm change, I will post the documentation change and
> you guys can discuss?

FYI, the crosvm patch is merged here:

https://github.com/google/crosvm/commit/4e7d00be2e135b0a2d964320ea4276e5d896f426

Will