From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78234A00E6 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 17:12:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E74001B954; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 17:12:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF2C6322C for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 17:12:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8663648F; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 11:12:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 09 Jul 2019 11:12:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=RpP7adoK2ZgiUIjAIOTJWW4Wa41rzKjeQWUgkY+e9Ek=; b=MVo/Ln2kZrb9 LW0Zz0ldBTPIoE3khYkTJNRSL8YF1GJxeNmYteknV8WTjju+OnWJGZGn7GTqerSD gdEUiCeRULeQXZKAlfYugguUnkI4v8+Cg4dJRw+liOItXoGQzjvVPNduDG+8AIqL BPz0n1z7kskX8+vaHQ0+jDWuOjTZhhw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=RpP7adoK2ZgiUIjAIOTJWW4Wa41rzKjeQWUgkY+e9 Ek=; b=eJmBDg064cYpyConbQfZxse6SMEZv3EbOOXj1U/SfQCjOOpE/veVk2DYd BAere3F08AyowsCQ1t7iyskutBpQ7qa7ed28X8YyrjrWyhwDY5oK+HXV1zcmuhpS Bc5dyg9aWWeNi3jLRA4ArMVZZlDQjvF4eqNgagNSndl6PAkjVLO9QclKrmdaHVly CoJ4/TZVLisHsve3bzQ26Bnvs7/uqK/6lfBRRSp6l3pGzCtK2qB9ocFGEr1ig20d x9mja6xCM2h5EyEfPj6KAnR4YBfel7dVyrk0m9Fw1ouyQ2AicVXfsfGLTBeE4aTZ XUITQc0wvQsMLIdruIwlsC0oBkH+Q== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrgedvgdeklecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkph epjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhho mhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4280780065; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 11:12:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Burakov, Anatoly" Cc: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran , David Marchand , dev , Ben Walker Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 17:12:22 +0200 Message-ID: <2514934.U1Lao15di9@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20190708142450.51597-1-jerinj@marvell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH] bus/pci: fix IOVA as VA mode selection 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 09/07/2019 17:02, Burakov, Anatoly: > When IOMMU is fully enabled (iommu=on at boot time), igb_uio will simply > not work. VFIO will work, whichever address mode you use. > > When IOMMU is in pass-through mode (iommu=pt at boot time), both igb_uio > and VFIO will work, although igb_uio will only support IOVA as PA mode. > Both modes will enable IOMMU, and both can run in IOVA as PA mode > without losing that protection. > > It's only when IOMMU is off, igb_uio will not engage IOMMU, and VFIO > will only work in no-IOMMU mode (thus not engaging IOMMU either), and > only then you lack the IOMMU protection. Could we try to make IOMMU status clear in DPDK logs? Then we could check the kernel drivers loaded and give a compatibility status for each of them as debug logs.