On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 12:50:09AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 05:38:23AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >
> > On other systems, including SPARC and PPC64, virtio-pci devices are
> > enumerated as though they are behind an IOMMU, but the virtio host
> > ignores th
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 12:50:09AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 05:38:23AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >
> > On other systems, including SPARC and PPC64, virtio-pci devices are
> > enumerated as though they are behind an IOMMU, but the virtio host
> > ignores th
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 05:38:23AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> On other systems, including SPARC and PPC64, virtio-pci devices are
> enumerated as though they are behind an IOMMU, but the virtio host
> ignores the IOMMU, so we must either pretend that the IOMMU isn't
> there or somehow ma
Hi,
[auto build test ERROR on stable/master]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help
improve the system]
url:
https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Michael-S-Tsirkin/virtio-new-feature-to-detect-IOMMU-device-quirk/20160724-030032
base: https://git.
Hi,
[auto build test WARNING on stable/master]
[also build test WARNING on v4.7-rc7 next-20160722]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help
improve the system]
url:
https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Michael-S-Tsirkin/virtio-new-feature-to-detect-I
The interaction between virtio and IOMMUs is messy.
On most systems with virtio, physical addresses match bus addresses,
and it doesn't particularly matter which one we use to program
the device.
On some systems, including Xen and any system with a physical device
that speaks virtio behind a phys
