|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] [VTD][patch 0/6] HVM device assignment using vt-d
Hi Muli,
I will need to check with people on HW availability outside of Intel and
get back to you.
I just checked out your iommu patch. Yes, this is a framework we can
look into using. It is just a matter of mapping hypercalls and
iommu_ops. It is possible we may need to add some operations. I would
be happy to work with you on this.
I see that your hypercall definitions do not contain
interrupt/ioport/mmio related stuff. I'm wondering how do you handle
these on Calgary implementation.
Allen
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Muli Ben-Yehuda [mailto:muli@xxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 12:53 PM
>To: Kay, Allen M
>Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [VTD][patch 0/6] HVM device
>assignment using vt-d
>
>On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 11:21:29AM -0700, Kay, Allen M wrote:
>> Keir,
>>
>> Following 6 patches are for enabling PCI device assignment to a HVM
>> domain using vt-d. We have done no-harm-done testing for PV and
>> non-vtd HVM guests on 32PAE, x86_64 and IPF. See below for details
>> of the patch.
>
>Cool! I have a couple of questions:
>
>1. When is VT-d hardware expected to be available?
>2. We need a way for this to work with multiple IOMMUs - VT-d, AMD's
> upcoming IOMMU and IBM's Calgary/CalIOC2 family of IOMMUs are the
> ones that are either available or will be soon. From a quick look
> at the code your patch is VT-d specific? What I've done so far in
> the xen-iommu tree is to add a new platform op by which dom0 tells
> Xen about the presence of a new IOMMU and then add a common layer
> in Xen for different IOMMUs to hook into using an iommu_ops
> structure. Will this work for you, or do you have something else in
> mind?
>
>More to come as I digest your patches. It's great to finally see VT-d
>support out-there!
>
>Cheers,
>Muli
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
|
|