With an ARM SMMU, interrupt remapping should always be safe from the
SMMU's point of view, as it is properly handled by the GIC.
Signed-off-by: Antonios Motakis
---
drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iom
io...@lists.linux-foundation.org
> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org; eric.au...@linaro.org; open list;
> will.dea...@arm.com; a.r...@virtualopensystems.com; Yoder Stuart-B08248;
> moderated list:ARM SMMU DRIVER; Antonios Motakis;
> t...@virtualopensystems.com; christoffer.d...@linaro.org
> Subject: [R
On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 07:03:12PM +0200, Antonios Motakis wrote:
> With an ARM SMMU, interrupt remapping should always be safe from the
> SMMU's point of view, as it is properly handled by the GIC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Antonios Motakis
> ---
> drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1
On Sun, Jun 08, 2014 at 12:31:29PM +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 07:03:12PM +0200, Antonios Motakis wrote:
> > With an ARM SMMU, interrupt remapping should always be safe from the
> > SMMU's point of view, as it is properly handled by the GIC.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anto
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 03:53:44PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 08, 2014 at 12:31:29PM +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 07:03:12PM +0200, Antonios Motakis wrote:
> > > With an ARM SMMU, interrupt remapping should always be safe from the
> > > SMMU's point of vi
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 04:13:29PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> MSIs look just like memory accesses made by the device, so the SMMU
> will translate them to point at the GIC ITS (doorbell). The ITS then
> has tables to work out how to route the MSI.
>
> So, if IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP is simply suppose
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 04:21:58PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 04:13:29PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > MSIs look just like memory accesses made by the device, so the SMMU
> > will translate them to point at the GIC ITS (doorbell). The ITS then
> > has tables to work out ho
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 17:21 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 04:13:29PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > MSIs look just like memory accesses made by the device, so the SMMU
> > will translate them to point at the GIC ITS (doorbell). The ITS then
> > has tables to work out how to ro
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 04:25:26PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Ok, thanks. In which case, I think this is really a combined property of
> the SMMU and the interrupt controller, so we might need some extra code
> so that the SMMU can check that the interrupt controller for the device
> is also capab
PATCH v6 04/20] iommu/arm-smmu: add capability
IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 04:25:26PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Ok, thanks. In which case, I think this is really a combined property
> of the SMMU and the interrupt controller, so we might need some extra
> code so tha
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v6 04/20] iommu/arm-smmu: add capability
IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP
Forgive me if this discussion is not relative here, but I thought it is.
How is VFIO restricting devices from writing to MSI/MSI-X, Is all the vector
area is mapped by VFIO to trap the accesses. I am asking this
@vger.kernel.org; open list; alex.william...@redhat.com;
stuart.yo...@freescale.com; io...@lists.linux-foundation.org;
t...@virtualopensystems.com; kvm...@lists.cs.columbia.edu; moderated list:ARM
SMMU DRIVER
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v6 04/20] iommu/arm-smmu: add capability
IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP
del; Will Deacon
> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org; open list; alex.william...@redhat.com;
> stuart.yo...@freescale.com; io...@lists.linux-foundation.org;
> t...@virtualopensystems.com; kvm...@lists.cs.columbia.edu; moderated list:ARM
> SMMU DRIVER
> Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v6 04/20] iommu/arm-smmu:
; kvm...@lists.cs.columbia.edu; moderated list:ARM
SMMU DRIVER
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v6 04/20] iommu/arm-smmu: add capability
IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP
On Thu, 2014-06-26 at 18:41 +, Chalamarla, Tirumalesh wrote:
> Sorry there was a type,
>
> The question is:
>
> How is VFIO
art.yo...@freescale.com; io...@lists.linux-foundation.org;
> t...@virtualopensystems.com; kvm...@lists.cs.columbia.edu; moderated list:ARM
> SMMU DRIVER
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v6 04/20] iommu/arm-smmu: add capability
> IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP
>
> On Thu, 2014-06-26 at 18:41 +, C
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 08:36:24PM +0100, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-06-26 at 19:10 +, Chalamarla, Tirumalesh wrote:
> > Thanks for the clarification Alex, That’s exactly my point, why are we
> > relying on QEMU or something else to emulate the MSI space when we can
> > directly giv
SMMU DRIVER; marc.zyng...@arm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v6 04/20] iommu/arm-smmu: add capability
IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 08:36:24PM +0100, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-06-26 at 19:10 +, Chalamarla, Tirumalesh wrote:
> > Thanks for the clarifica
Friday, June 27, 2014 1:47 AM
> To: Alex Williamson
> Cc: Chalamarla, Tirumalesh; Joerg Roedel; kvm@vger.kernel.org; open list;
> stuart.yo...@freescale.com; io...@lists.linux-foundation.org;
> t...@virtualopensystems.com; kvm...@lists.cs.columbia.edu; moderated list:ARM
> SMMU DRIVER;
18 matches
Mail list logo
