Avi Kivity wrote: > Han, Weidong wrote: >> It's hard to move kvm_vtd_domain inside current iommu API. It's kvm >> specific. It's not elegant to include kvm_vtd_domain stuffs in native >> VT-d code. > > It's cleaner than adding knowledge of how the iommu works to kvm.
I will try to move kvm_vtd_domain inside iommu API. I suspect it would need much changes on VT-d code. > >> I think leave it in kvm side is more clean at this point. >> Moveover it's very simple. I read Joerg's iommu API foils just now, I >> think it's good. Native AMD iommu code will be in 2.6.28, it's a >> suitable to implement a generic iommu API based both on Intel and AMD >> iommu for kvm after 2.6.28. What's your opinion? >> > > 2.6.27 is out, so anything we do will be for 2.6.29. Do you mean the VT-d patches which haven't been checked in won't be pushed into 2.6.28? Regards, Weidong -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
