Hi, On 3/27/25 8:54 AM, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Nicolin Chen <[email protected]> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2025 7:47 PM >> To: Eric Auger <[email protected]> >> Cc: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi >> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; >> [email protected]; [email protected]; Linuxarm >> <[email protected]>; Wangzhou (B) <[email protected]>; >> jiangkunkun <[email protected]>; Jonathan Cameron >> <[email protected]>; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 17/20] hw/arm/smmuv3: Check idr registers for >> STE_S1CDMAX and STE_S1STALLD >> >>> Again I think we need to understand the consequence of having a more >>> comprehensive support of SSID. This also holds with old the IDR fields >>> that may be inherited from the HW and we don't support yet in the >>> emulation code >> To support guest-level SVA, it must support SSID. We can keep the >> SSIDSIZE=0 in an emulated SMMU. Would you elaborate the concern of >> doing so? I just want to make sure we dissociate both accel and emulated paths and we do not advertise SSID in one mode while we do not fully support it. >> > Regarding adding support for SSID/SVA in emulation code, the support also > depends on > device PRI/IOPF feature as well. Do we have any emulated devices that can > make use > this? I would say we can add that support later if there is any real use > cases for that.
x86 may be ahead of us in this area. Maybe this was tested by Zhenzhong when contributing emulation for S1 support in intel_iommu? Eric > > Thanks, > Shameer
