On 04 Feb 2021 13:25, Al Stone wrote: > On 03 Feb 2021 09:46, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 01:27:13PM -0700, Al Stone wrote: > > > On 02 Feb 2021 10:17, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: > > > > Hi Al, > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 01:18:25PM -0700, Al Stone wrote: > > > > > > I updated the doc: > > > > > > https://jpbrucker.net/virtio-iommu/viot/viot-v9.pdf > > > > > > You can incorporate it into the ASWG proposal. > > > > > > Changes since v8: > > > > > > * One typo (s/programing/programming/) > > > > > > * Modified the PCI Range node to include a segment range. > > > > > > > > > > > > I also updated the Linux and QEMU implementations on branch > > > > > > virtio-iommu/devel in https://jpbrucker.net/git/linux/ and > > > > > > https://jpbrucker.net/git/qemu/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again for helping with this > > > > > > > > > > > > Jean > > > > > > > > > > Perfect. Thanks. I'll update the ASWG info right away. > > > > > > > > Has there been any more feedback on the VIOT specification? I'm > > > > wondering > > > > when we can start upstreaming support for it. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jean > > > > > > Ah, sorry, Jean. I meant to get back to you sooner. My apologies. > > > > > > The latest version that resulted from the discussion with Yinghan of > > > Microsoft is the one in front the ASWG; I think if you upstream that > > > version, it should be identical to the spec when it is next published > > > (post ACPI 6.4). > > > > > > The process is: (1) propose the change, (2) review it in committee, > > > (3) give people more time to think about it, then (4) have a finale > > > vote. We've been iterating over (1), (2) and (3). Since there was > > > no new discussion at the last meeting, we should have the final vote > > > on this (4) in the next meeting. I had hoped we could do that last > > > week but the meeting was canceled at the last minute. I hope to have > > > the final vote this Thursday and will let you know as soon as it has > > > been decided. > > > > > > My apologies for the delays; getting things done by committee always > > > takes a bazillion times longer than one would think. > > > > No worries, thanks a lot for the update! > > > > Thanks, > > Jean > > Sigh. Just got a note that today's meeting has been canceled :(. > > So, next week for the final vote. OTOH, there have been no comments > of any sort on the proposal -- and silence is good, in this case.
Would you believe last week's meeting was canceled, too? Not sure why the chair/co-chair are doing this but I'm finding it a little frustrating. We'll try again this week ... again, apologies for the delays. I'd recommend going with the last version posted just so progress can be made. The spec can always be fixed later. -- ciao, al ----------------------------------- Al Stone Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. a...@redhat.com ----------------------------------- _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
