RE: [PATCH v2 3/4] doc: give specific instructions for running as non-root

[Dmitry Kozlyuk <dkozlyuk@nvidia.com>]

> From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 7:38 PM
> > [...]
> > +If the driver requires using physical addresses (PA),
> > +the executable file must be granted additional capabilities:
> > +
> > +* ``SYS_ADMIN`` to read ``/proc/self/pagemaps``
> > +* ``IPC_LOCK`` to lock hugepages in memory
> 
> Are either of these necessary if using vfio-pci and VA mode? I have
> seen it previously reported that IPC_LOCK is necessary for IOMMU
> memory mapping for DMA - at least for docker containers - so I'd
> like it confirmed that we don't need them in the in-memory case
> running on the host. If I get the chance I'll try double-checking
> by testing myself.

Sorry, I don't have a physical device using vfio-pci to check.
MLX5 that I have tested doesn't need these capabilities,
but it locks memory from the kernel side.
Note that --in-memory doesn't imply --iova-mode=va.

> 
> > +
> > +.. code-block:: console
> > +
> > +   setcap cap_ipc_lock,cap_sys_admin+ep <executable>
> > +
> > +If physical addresses are not accessible,
> > +the following message will appear during EAL initialization::
> > +
> > +  EAL: rte_mem_virt2phy(): cannot open /proc/self/pagemap:
> Permission denied
> > +
> > +It is harmless in case PA are not needed.
> > +
> 
> While this is probably worth having in the doc, I think we should
> really
> include a note here about using vfio-pci rather than uio and therefore
> not
> needing physical addresses.

A note won't harm. There are also non-PCI devices, though.

> > +For ``virtio`` PMD in legacy mode, ``SYS_RAWIO`` capability is
> required
> > +for ``iopl()`` call to enable access to PCI IO ports.
> >
> 
> How "legacy" is legacy-mode? Is it still likely in widespread use that
> we need this?

I don't really know.
The spec says that legacy support is optional
(2.2.3 Legacy Interface: A Note on Feature Bits) and it aims
to reduce the chance of a legacy driver attempting to drive the device
(4.1.2.1 Device Requirements: PCI Device Discovery).
OTOH, DPDK supports it and requirements must be documented.
I can add a line suggesting to use modern virtio,
but also don't mind removing this.

I'll address skipped comments in v3, thanks.