| Message ID | 1376552966-8529-1-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 05:49:26PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > This is to reserve a capablity number for upcoming support > of VFIO-IOMMU DMA operations in real mode. > > The last ioctl in the group which KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU is added to > is 0xac, the next two numbers are taken - 0xad for KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL and 0xac was also taken by KVM_SET_ONE_REG :( > 0xae for KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT. So the KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU ioclt gets > 0xaf. > > Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru> > > --- > Changes: > 2013/08/15 v8: > * fixed comment again > > 2013/08/15: > * fixed mistype in comments > * fixed commit message which says what uses ioctls 0xad and 0xae > > 2013/07/16: > * changed the number > > 2013/07/11: > * changed order in a file, added comment about a gap in ioctl number > --- > include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > index 99c2533..bd94127 100644 > --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > @@ -668,6 +668,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_smmu_info { > #define KVM_CAP_IRQ_XICS 92 > #define KVM_CAP_ARM_EL1_32BIT 93 > #define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE 94 > +#define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU 95 > > #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING > > @@ -933,6 +934,11 @@ struct kvm_s390_ucas_mapping { > #define KVM_ARM_SET_DEVICE_ADDR _IOW(KVMIO, 0xab, struct kvm_arm_device_addr) > /* Available with KVM_CAP_PPC_RTAS */ > #define KVM_PPC_RTAS_DEFINE_TOKEN _IOW(KVMIO, 0xac, struct kvm_rtas_token_args) > +/* 0xad is taken by KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL */ > +/* 0xae is taken by KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT */ > +/* Available with KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU */ > +#define KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU _IOW(KVMIO, 0xaf, \ > + struct kvm_create_spapr_tce_iommu) > Why not use KVM_CREATE_DEVICE API for that? > /* ioctl for vm fd */ > #define KVM_CREATE_DEVICE _IOWR(KVMIO, 0xe0, struct kvm_create_device) > -- > 1.8.3.2 -- Gleb.
On 08/27/2013 05:56 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 05:49:26PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >> This is to reserve a capablity number for upcoming support >> of VFIO-IOMMU DMA operations in real mode. >> >> The last ioctl in the group which KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU is added to >> is 0xac, the next two numbers are taken - 0xad for KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL and > 0xac was also taken by KVM_SET_ONE_REG :( > >> 0xae for KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT. So the KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU ioclt gets >> 0xaf. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru> >> >> --- >> Changes: >> 2013/08/15 v8: >> * fixed comment again >> >> 2013/08/15: >> * fixed mistype in comments >> * fixed commit message which says what uses ioctls 0xad and 0xae >> >> 2013/07/16: >> * changed the number >> >> 2013/07/11: >> * changed order in a file, added comment about a gap in ioctl number >> --- >> include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 6 ++++++ >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h >> index 99c2533..bd94127 100644 >> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h >> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h >> @@ -668,6 +668,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_smmu_info { >> #define KVM_CAP_IRQ_XICS 92 >> #define KVM_CAP_ARM_EL1_32BIT 93 >> #define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE 94 >> +#define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU 95 >> >> #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING >> >> @@ -933,6 +934,11 @@ struct kvm_s390_ucas_mapping { >> #define KVM_ARM_SET_DEVICE_ADDR _IOW(KVMIO, 0xab, struct kvm_arm_device_addr) >> /* Available with KVM_CAP_PPC_RTAS */ >> #define KVM_PPC_RTAS_DEFINE_TOKEN _IOW(KVMIO, 0xac, struct kvm_rtas_token_args) >> +/* 0xad is taken by KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL */ >> +/* 0xae is taken by KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT */ >> +/* Available with KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU */ >> +#define KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU _IOW(KVMIO, 0xaf, \ >> + struct kvm_create_spapr_tce_iommu) >> > Why not use KVM_CREATE_DEVICE API for that? Because when I came up with my ioctl first time, it was not in upstream and since then nobody pointed me to this new ioctl :) So my stuff is not going to upstream again. Heh. Ok. I'll implement it. > >> /* ioctl for vm fd */ >> #define KVM_CREATE_DEVICE _IOWR(KVMIO, 0xe0, struct kvm_create_device)
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 06:42:18PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 08/27/2013 05:56 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 05:49:26PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > >> This is to reserve a capablity number for upcoming support > >> of VFIO-IOMMU DMA operations in real mode. > >> > >> The last ioctl in the group which KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU is added to > >> is 0xac, the next two numbers are taken - 0xad for KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL and > > 0xac was also taken by KVM_SET_ONE_REG :( > > > >> 0xae for KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT. So the KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU ioclt gets > >> 0xaf. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru> > >> > >> --- > >> Changes: > >> 2013/08/15 v8: > >> * fixed comment again > >> > >> 2013/08/15: > >> * fixed mistype in comments > >> * fixed commit message which says what uses ioctls 0xad and 0xae > >> > >> 2013/07/16: > >> * changed the number > >> > >> 2013/07/11: > >> * changed order in a file, added comment about a gap in ioctl number > >> --- > >> include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 6 ++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > >> index 99c2533..bd94127 100644 > >> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > >> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > >> @@ -668,6 +668,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_smmu_info { > >> #define KVM_CAP_IRQ_XICS 92 > >> #define KVM_CAP_ARM_EL1_32BIT 93 > >> #define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE 94 > >> +#define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU 95 > >> > >> #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING > >> > >> @@ -933,6 +934,11 @@ struct kvm_s390_ucas_mapping { > >> #define KVM_ARM_SET_DEVICE_ADDR _IOW(KVMIO, 0xab, struct kvm_arm_device_addr) > >> /* Available with KVM_CAP_PPC_RTAS */ > >> #define KVM_PPC_RTAS_DEFINE_TOKEN _IOW(KVMIO, 0xac, struct kvm_rtas_token_args) > >> +/* 0xad is taken by KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL */ > >> +/* 0xae is taken by KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT */ > >> +/* Available with KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU */ > >> +#define KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU _IOW(KVMIO, 0xaf, \ > >> + struct kvm_create_spapr_tce_iommu) > >> > > Why not use KVM_CREATE_DEVICE API for that? > > > Because when I came up with my ioctl first time, it was not in upstream and > since then nobody pointed me to this new ioctl :) Sorry about that :(. The ioctl exists for a while now, but with v8 patch I imaging your patch series predates it. > So my stuff is not going to upstream again. Heh. Ok. I'll implement it. > Thanks! Should I keep KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE capability patch or can I drop it for now? -- Gleb.
On 08/27/2013 08:58 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 06:42:18PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >> On 08/27/2013 05:56 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 05:49:26PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >>>> This is to reserve a capablity number for upcoming support >>>> of VFIO-IOMMU DMA operations in real mode. >>>> >>>> The last ioctl in the group which KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU is added to >>>> is 0xac, the next two numbers are taken - 0xad for KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL and >>> 0xac was also taken by KVM_SET_ONE_REG :( >>> >>>> 0xae for KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT. So the KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU ioclt gets >>>> 0xaf. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru> >>>> >>>> --- >>>> Changes: >>>> 2013/08/15 v8: >>>> * fixed comment again >>>> >>>> 2013/08/15: >>>> * fixed mistype in comments >>>> * fixed commit message which says what uses ioctls 0xad and 0xae >>>> >>>> 2013/07/16: >>>> * changed the number >>>> >>>> 2013/07/11: >>>> * changed order in a file, added comment about a gap in ioctl number >>>> --- >>>> include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 6 ++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h >>>> index 99c2533..bd94127 100644 >>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h >>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h >>>> @@ -668,6 +668,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_smmu_info { >>>> #define KVM_CAP_IRQ_XICS 92 >>>> #define KVM_CAP_ARM_EL1_32BIT 93 >>>> #define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE 94 >>>> +#define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU 95 >>>> >>>> #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING >>>> >>>> @@ -933,6 +934,11 @@ struct kvm_s390_ucas_mapping { >>>> #define KVM_ARM_SET_DEVICE_ADDR _IOW(KVMIO, 0xab, struct kvm_arm_device_addr) >>>> /* Available with KVM_CAP_PPC_RTAS */ >>>> #define KVM_PPC_RTAS_DEFINE_TOKEN _IOW(KVMIO, 0xac, struct kvm_rtas_token_args) >>>> +/* 0xad is taken by KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL */ >>>> +/* 0xae is taken by KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT */ >>>> +/* Available with KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU */ >>>> +#define KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU _IOW(KVMIO, 0xaf, \ >>>> + struct kvm_create_spapr_tce_iommu) >>>> >>> Why not use KVM_CREATE_DEVICE API for that? >> >> >> Because when I came up with my ioctl first time, it was not in upstream and >> since then nobody pointed me to this new ioctl :) > Sorry about that :(. The ioctl exists for a while now, but with v8 patch I > imaging your patch series predates it. The ioctl I made up is basically a copy of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE which does the same thing for emulated devices and it is there for quite a while but it is not really extensible. And these two ioctls share some bits of code. Now we will have 2 pieces of code which do almost the same thing but in a different way. Kinda sucks :( >> So my stuff is not going to upstream again. Heh. Ok. I'll implement it. >> > Thanks! Should I keep KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE capability patch or can I > drop it for now? Please keep it, it is unrelated to the IOMMU-VFIO thing.
On Wed, 2013-08-28 at 10:51 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > The ioctl I made up is basically a copy of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE which does > the same thing for emulated devices and it is there for quite a while but > it is not really extensible. And these two ioctls share some bits of code. > Now we will have 2 pieces of code which do almost the same thing but in a > different way. Kinda sucks :( Right. Thus the question, Gleb, we can either: - Keep Alexey patch as-is allowing us to *finally* merge that stuff that's been around for monthes - Convert *both* existing TCE objects to the new KVM_CREATE_DEVICE, and have some backward compat code for the old one. I don't think it makes sense to have the "emulated TCE" and "IOMMU TCE" objects use a fundamentally different API and infrastructure. > >> So my stuff is not going to upstream again. Heh. Ok. I'll implement it. > >> > > Thanks! Should I keep KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE capability patch or can I > > drop it for now? > > Please keep it, it is unrelated to the IOMMU-VFIO thing.
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:26:31AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2013-08-28 at 10:51 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > > The ioctl I made up is basically a copy of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE which does > > the same thing for emulated devices and it is there for quite a while but > > it is not really extensible. And these two ioctls share some bits of code. > > Now we will have 2 pieces of code which do almost the same thing but in a > > different way. Kinda sucks :( > > Right. Thus the question, Gleb, we can either: > > - Keep Alexey patch as-is allowing us to *finally* merge that stuff > that's been around for monthes > > - Convert *both* existing TCE objects to the new > KVM_CREATE_DEVICE, and have some backward compat code for the old one. > > I don't think it makes sense to have the "emulated TCE" and "IOMMU TCE" > objects use a fundamentally different API and infrastructure. > As a general rule we are not going to mandate converting old devices to new API, but if it make sense to do here I would much prefer that over adding another special ioctl > > >> So my stuff is not going to upstream again. Heh. Ok. I'll implement it. > > >> > > > Thanks! Should I keep KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE capability patch or can I > > > drop it for now? > > > > Please keep it, it is unrelated to the IOMMU-VFIO thing. > -- Gleb.
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h index 99c2533..bd94127 100644 --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h @@ -668,6 +668,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_smmu_info { #define KVM_CAP_IRQ_XICS 92 #define KVM_CAP_ARM_EL1_32BIT 93 #define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE 94 +#define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU 95 #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING @@ -933,6 +934,11 @@ struct kvm_s390_ucas_mapping { #define KVM_ARM_SET_DEVICE_ADDR _IOW(KVMIO, 0xab, struct kvm_arm_device_addr) /* Available with KVM_CAP_PPC_RTAS */ #define KVM_PPC_RTAS_DEFINE_TOKEN _IOW(KVMIO, 0xac, struct kvm_rtas_token_args) +/* 0xad is taken by KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL */ +/* 0xae is taken by KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT */ +/* Available with KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU */ +#define KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU _IOW(KVMIO, 0xaf, \ + struct kvm_create_spapr_tce_iommu) /* ioctl for vm fd */ #define KVM_CREATE_DEVICE _IOWR(KVMIO, 0xe0, struct kvm_create_device)
This is to reserve a capablity number for upcoming support of VFIO-IOMMU DMA operations in real mode. The last ioctl in the group which KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU is added to is 0xac, the next two numbers are taken - 0xad for KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL and 0xae for KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT. So the KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU ioclt gets 0xaf. Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru> --- Changes: 2013/08/15 v8: * fixed comment again 2013/08/15: * fixed mistype in comments * fixed commit message which says what uses ioctls 0xad and 0xae 2013/07/16: * changed the number 2013/07/11: * changed order in a file, added comment about a gap in ioctl number --- include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)