Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE][RFC] KVMGT - the implementation of Intel GVT-g(full GPU virtualization) for KVM

2014-12-05 Thread Daniel Vetter 
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 09:50:21AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > 
> > https://www.usenix.org/conference/atc14/technical-sessions/presentation/tian
> 
> /me goes read this.
> 
> A few comments on the kernel stuff (brief look so far, also
> compile-tested only, intel gfx on my test machine is too old).
> 
>  * Noticed the kernel bits don't even compile when configured as
>module.  Everything (vgt, i915, kvm) must be compiled into the
>kernel.
>  * Design approach still seems to be i915 on vgt not the other way
>around.

Yeah done a quick read-through of just the i915 bits too, same comment. I
guess this is just the first RFC and the redesign we've discussed about
already with xengt is in progress somewhere?

Thanks, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE][RFC] KVMGT - the implementation of Intel GVT-g(full GPU virtualization) for KVM

2014-12-08 Thread Daniel Vetter 
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:55:01AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> On Sa, 2014-12-06 at 12:17 +0800, Jike Song wrote:
> > I don't know that is exactly needed, we also need to have Windows
> > driver considered.  However, I'm quite confident that, if things gonna
> > work for IGD passthrough, it gonna work for GVT-g.
> 
> I'd suggest to focus on q35 emulation.  q35 is new enough that a version
> with integrated graphics exists, so the gap we have to close is *much*
> smaller.
> 
> In case guests expect a northbridge matching the chipset generation of
> the graphics device (which I'd expect is the case, after digging a bit
> in the igd and agpgart linux driver code) I think we should add proper
> device emulation for them, i.e. comply q35-pcihost with
> sandybridge-pcihost + ivybridge-pcihost + haswell-pcihost instead of
> just copying over the pci ids from the host.  Most likely all those
> variants can share most of the emulation code.

I don't think i915.ko should care about either northbridge nor pch on
para-virtualized platforms. We do noodle around in there for the oddball
memory controller setting and for some display stuff. But neither of that
really applies to paravirtualized hw. And if there's any case like that we
should  patch it out (like we do with some of the runtime pm code
already).
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html