From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com (mail-pa0-f41.google.com [209.85.220.41]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0364C8D96 for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 00:12:09 +0100 (CET) Received: by pacdm15 with SMTP id dm15so36988125pac.3 for ; Wed, 09 Dec 2015 15:12:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AJIZPe4Gq+11Ep3MRo+r48b7hE9ashdtPN70DwvEhgs=; b=JrAbcHeoC3AwMS3OeX+MIlPlZfgBzuem9kTnEsn1cebr3YIYTeUX30RO4YiodFq11q aM6MxJqlFgQCzofQ94EIJOLjE3K48nDjQjMuc8nWxS+616Ri6qSibXjWa1aKXyIjDvE8 cG0Sv5DC4QPKDinUXbUACdMgB3iDXKdLDYJ2CIeh2VeK09PbF0jsdFK43U9eheI49AJu QIEwbt/iw95FFxZtNGTBgemCYSrQG09yb6/FYgGXZq8RSXYVuLAnwW4eejJ5Ghgqf6gG aFBHZzNgit2qeY/IpUP8EYuQR5O+B3+/9riNiGJnFhrBHGFzLJXFttZJtDRSlEocE+Rk 8uYQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AJIZPe4Gq+11Ep3MRo+r48b7hE9ashdtPN70DwvEhgs=; b=YwHl8BRoKHBk58AOUgsKSQoVqeR1yc8xVMxkbo33EyKuswXBDuW7EP/0XDHIrHoOXR Q46PH09P/M/EjPM4c2vgM/pY5PE59vkjpnPaqDmefxE86rj1u+jsuYqrqkTLXbLqAxWu nsbLs/m493T4sVNkSUjqDoldf+6wX1lw3xV5uK9nYWGFwrg4YyyrGlhKguRKVhXxLXSf KqoPfCFJMW1HTSTB7tB3G5dYmYgqacESSo29HGZYT1I0kXyz2peyu9KMUVoF1LfOgLVe BS3/yGtIz1xeuy9L4RSVB1o+yCpsNPA/FW91XYxc/vUiSZjCzoicoFu+O6k38hhtWSNy Ij5w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm4i1hpGxk8CnXvzf/STTcVswYIWqgAsnPF3BKuIwMAeiA07wZUE8w2J1MwAHtq2N1jF1+Mhw8hmecXyuwO8Rj5dkIPVQ== X-Received: by 10.66.153.198 with SMTP id vi6mr11941720pab.37.1449702728123; Wed, 09 Dec 2015 15:12:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from xeon-e3 (static-50-53-82-155.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net. [50.53.82.155]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id cp4sm4777019pad.41.2015.12.09.15.12.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 09 Dec 2015 15:12:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 15:12:15 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Thomas Monjalon Message-ID: <20151209151215.4d88b9d4@xeon-e3> In-Reply-To: <2072515.rqoGFgxSIN@xps13> References: <1449683756-13381-1-git-send-email-stephen@networkplumber.org> <2562631.e9AmeysRzG@xps13> <20151209135801.17965487@xeon-e3> <2072515.rqoGFgxSIN@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Avi Kivity , Alex Williamson Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] vfio: support iommu group zero X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 23:12:09 -0000 On Wed, 09 Dec 2015 23:49:59 +0100 Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2015-12-09 13:58, Stephen Hemminger: > > On Wed, 09 Dec 2015 22:12:33 +0100 > > Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > > 2015-12-09 09:55, Stephen Hemminger: > > > > The current implementation of VFIO will not with the new no-IOMMU mode > > > > in 4.4 kernel. The original code assumed that IOMMU group zero would > > > > never be used. Group numbers are assigned starting at zero, and up > > > > until now the group numbers came from the hardware which is likely > > > > to use group 0 for system devices that are not used with DPDK. > > > > > > > > The fix is to allow 0 as a valid group and rearrange code > > > > to split the return value from the group value. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger > > > > --- > > > > Why was this ignored? It was originally sent on 26 Oct 15 back > > > > when IOMMU discussion was lively. > > > > > > There was no review of this patch. > > > The patch has been marked as deferred recently when it was too late > > > to do such feature changes in DPDK code: > > > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/8035/ > > > > This is why as a fallback the MAINTAINER has to review the patch > > or direct a sub-maintainer to do it. I think almost 2 months is > > plenty of time for review. > > 27 October was 3 days before the feature deadline. > And you have not pinged about it since then. > But that's true I have missed the importance of this patch. > Would it help to have it integrated today? > Are you sure it won't break something else? Could the original VFIO submitter from Intel review it.