Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753371AbZIOMdO (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:33:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752355AbZIOMdJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:33:09 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:15220 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751514AbZIOMdI (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:33:08 -0400 Message-ID: <4AAF8966.3040602@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:32:38 +0300 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090814 Fedora/3.0-2.6.b3.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" CC: Gregory Haskins , "Ira W. Snyder" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hpa@zytor.com, Rusty Russell , s.hetze@linux-ag.com Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 3/3] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server References: <20090827160750.GD23722@redhat.com> <20090903183945.GF28651@ovro.caltech.edu> <20090907101537.GH3031@redhat.com> <20090908172035.GB319@ovro.caltech.edu> <4AAA7415.5080204@gmail.com> <20090913120140.GA31218@redhat.com> <4AAE6A97.7090808@gmail.com> <20090914164750.GB3745@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20090914164750.GB3745@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1320 Lines: 34 On 09/14/2009 07:47 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 12:08:55PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote: > >> For Ira's example, the addresses would represent a physical address on >> the PCI boards, and would follow any kind of relevant rules for >> converting a "GPA" to a host accessible address (even if indirectly, via >> a dma controller). >> > I don't think limiting addresses to PCI physical addresses will work > well. From what I rememeber, Ira's x86 can not initiate burst > transactions on PCI, and it's the ppc that initiates all DMA. > vhost-net would run on the PPC then. >>> But we can't let the guest specify physical addresses. >>> >> Agreed. Neither your proposal nor mine operate this way afaict. >> > But this seems to be what Ira needs. > In Ira's scenario, the "guest" (x86 host) specifies x86 physical addresses, and the ppc dmas to them. It's the virtio model without any change. A normal guest also specifis physical addresses. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/