From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wj0-f176.google.com (mail-wj0-f176.google.com [209.85.210.176]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BD203777 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 11:11:35 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wj0-f176.google.com with SMTP id i20so6151603wjn.2 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2017 02:11:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=q6pXjvJO6om2d7sC4MAvDOTUvQTK1miFisWoMHWJE/M=; b=tr1JGArubsPWCz7alhsKpV6EMVdN+X4KBvNajZAV69SucKNw2b0E31G2pdJnhB41yW FRvbqULsOyNTVYWn1WsuH8Na2XKKPemTOPuDSBJIE53McyKVl3tc5r6vkdbDH1mgUkTg rbbYS/2J/oUJX9E7Wyi+0V2TNBPz8KnKuAyTZv779h8x8fEn5ygIWpXQ65ZLhsq8s68P UDg19VdnbFXAY1y3QNOzaqbYWSIKI1dn9tWhfL7bFmqco8pNSU4RrignNpYgIMG7Pkk0 7Hcjr+KVuG1WyLwWSmmFrnGxxzDO8aA/+z8qzWMIbHiQnRB+EVg6i23Vzf2SzmWj+ze2 rGWA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=q6pXjvJO6om2d7sC4MAvDOTUvQTK1miFisWoMHWJE/M=; b=sHV9CwHqVjEc55tSoqOtdIADowyMRxMQtzYBg1TW4qmlVXGIfA74Y2Kqn0CS2ZIjHB H8OrxW/YoD9cN4t/Sglmdv6a15hfx2do16k8xoTeWB3/EeuJOriHYy68PRnaKkSBcrOz 4KQPhIpv8B3sUTzpYvQAxbG3wRBz6vlDgz0Lo/5vKuovy8i3F/tH8qDEFOgxBsEgjyup CMgUCarwQmSgAb5CGshWmYSsNslIzaDEgIkWknDhd3WLMpCW7XYTWDkWALzS9bz678/E wNiuAS4vHIF/o62qyg1vEZyRbHew0EFYxxHvmR7s2OBdB2feKs/FT3me+O7UTCfPzrnD EL+g== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIYoKY/y1NUU1Ndt5YHHIQ3BDYCAbyJDrFpkbwfRVTSkdmpIhphMuOmo3kahPq1nZye X-Received: by 10.194.145.83 with SMTP id ss19mr66112888wjb.67.1483524695149; Wed, 04 Jan 2017 02:11:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w197sm94010765wmd.11.2017.01.04.02.11.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Jan 2017 02:11:34 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Walker, Benjamin" Cc: stephen@networkplumber.org, dev@dpdk.org Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 11:11:32 +0100 Message-ID: <3821624.b18tgR1uvW@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <1483483821.5643.4.camel@intel.com> References: <1483044080.11975.1.camel@intel.com> <20170102114709.0a2f5546@xeon-e3> <1483483821.5643.4.camel@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Running DPDK as an unprivileged user X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 10:11:35 -0000 2017-01-03 22:50, Walker, Benjamin: > 1) Physical addresses cannot be exposed to unprivileged users due to security > concerns (the fallout of rowhammer). Therefore, systems without an IOMMU can > only support privileged users. I think this is probably fine. > 2) The IOCTL from vfio to pin the memory is tied to specifying the DMA address > and programming the IOMMU. This is unfortunate - systems without an IOMMU still > want to do the pinning, but they need to be given the physical address instead > of specifying a DMA address. > 3) Not all device types, particularly in virtualization environments, support > vfio today. These devices have no way to explicitly pin memory. In VM we can use VFIO-noiommu. Is it helping for mapping?