> -----Original Message----- > From: Burakov, Anatoly <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 8:24 PM > To: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <[email protected]>; David Marchand > <[email protected]> > Cc: dev <[email protected]>; Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]>; Ben > Walker <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] bus/pci: fix IOVA as VA mode > selection > > On 09-Jul-19 3:00 PM, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Burakov, Anatoly <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 7:00 PM > >> To: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <[email protected]>; David Marchand > >> <[email protected]> > >> Cc: dev <[email protected]>; Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]>; > Ben > >> Walker <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] bus/pci: fix IOVA as VA > >> mode selection > >> > > <snip> > > >> > >>> # With top of tree, Currently it never runs in IOVA as VA mode. > >>> That’s a separate problem to fix. Which effect all the devices > >>> Currently supporting RTE_PCI_DRV_IOVA_AS_VA. Ie even though > Device > >>> support RTE_PCI_DRV_IOVA_AS_VA, it is not running With IOMMU > >>> protection and/or root privilege is required to run DPDK. > > > > By the way, there seems to be some confusion here. IOVA as PA mode does > *not* imply running without IOMMU protection. If IOVA as PA mode is used, > it would require root privileges (to get physical addresses), but the IOMMU > protection is still enabled. IOMMU doesn't care what you set up your
Yes. It was thinking more of VFIO perspective. Not igb_uio. > addresses as, and the fact that they're 1:1 PA addresses doesn't mean > IOMMU is not engaged. > > -- > Thanks, > Anatoly
