Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757650Ab0FBMTa (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jun 2010 08:19:30 -0400 Received: from 8bytes.org ([88.198.83.132]:55041 "EHLO 8bytes.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751575Ab0FBMT3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jun 2010 08:19:29 -0400 Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 14:19:28 +0200 From: Joerg Roedel To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Avi Kivity , Tom Lyon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, chrisw@sous-sol.org, hjk@linutronix.de, gregkh@suse.de, aafabbri@cisco.com, scofeldm@cisco.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] VFIO driver: Non-privileged user level PCI drivers Message-ID: <20100602121927.GA11162@8bytes.org> References: <4C04C085.1030107@redhat.com> <20100601095532.GA9178@redhat.com> <20100602094201.GC964@8bytes.org> <20100602095312.GA25335@redhat.com> <20100602101940.GG964@8bytes.org> <20100602102144.GD29023@redhat.com> <20100602103516.GI964@8bytes.org> <20100602103828.GF29023@redhat.com> <20100602111224.GA11033@8bytes.org> <20100602112100.GA29697@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100602112100.GA29697@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2304 Lines: 71 On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 02:21:00PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 01:12:25PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: > > Even if it is bound to a domain the userspace driver could program the > > device to do dma to unmapped regions causing io-page-faults. The kernel > > can't do anything about it. > > It can always corrupt its own memory directly as well :) > But that is not a reason not to detect errors if we can, > and not to make APIs hard to misuse. Changing the domain of a device while dma can happen is the same type of bug as unmapping potential dma target addresses. We can't catch this kind of misuse. > > > With 10 devices you have 10 extra ioctls. > > > > And this works implicitly with your proposal? > > Yes. so you do: > iommu = open > ioctl(dev1, BIND, iommu) > ioctl(dev2, BIND, iommu) > ioctl(dev3, BIND, iommu) > ioctl(dev4, BIND, iommu) > > No need to add a SHARE ioctl. In my proposal this looks like: dev1 = open(); ioctl(dev2, SHARE, dev1); ioctl(dev3, SHARE, dev1); ioctl(dev4, SHARE, dev1); So we actually save an ioctl. > > Remember that we still need to be able to provide seperate mappings > > for each device to support IOMMU emulation for the guest. > > Generally not true. E.g. guest can enable iommu passthrough > or have domain per a group of devices. What I meant was that there may me multiple io-addresses spaces necessary for one process. I didn't want to say that every device _needs_ to have its own address space. > > As I wrote the domain has a reference count and is destroyed only when > > it goes down to zero. This does not happen as long as a device is bound > > to it. > > > > Joerg > > We were talking about UNSHARE ioctl: > ioctl(dev1, UNSHARE, dev2) > Does it change the domain for dev1 or dev2? > If you make a mistake you get a hard to debug bug. As I already wrote we would have an UNBIND ioctl which just removes a device from its current domain. UNBIND is better than UNSHARE for exactly the reason you pointed out above. I thought I stated that already. Joerg -- 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/