From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com (mail-wm0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E8D92B8B for ; Mon, 2 Jan 2017 15:32:10 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f54.google.com with SMTP id a197so366623690wmd.0 for ; Mon, 02 Jan 2017 06:32:10 -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=h7LVbwnwNj7FbTH/L4FmqD8ihGycuqAoaAGLc/7bppE=; b=xiilY0C32xPbTPef3UgFssUTHFbv/JvfMHt6r7AJT/shhcD9cCaXsRRxT8QvcAy53L a7fGw+uAjyQhf0NzvqcCSAVA4EEkyRGpG61zIlDiQ9hqv1XHVjeDblm2rt5qN6z0n6yj YIO/QGwimeAE6ondFa8wFROmdj9z2LEHGJUFQ4iqmJQ06Ym7rncWFb3qiEPSszBLAfFL DXi5JDW41GMDH3IwvDeJGEqJr0bCFkIXa9klCZGbrwBITJthYrBz37iwsniylWkBufEi 6Syw9geP6XLxN5ABGpAPxJEJcRmK3/mZqbLFrPCo+5DC2zjKPhP9TXLCSKHh/Nb4nhlW 4DmQ== 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=h7LVbwnwNj7FbTH/L4FmqD8ihGycuqAoaAGLc/7bppE=; b=hxZCTTJhLkh03DCqkvaql8YwrRrdFd1JgvOE7VHi49fnKlnLUgVcyUSVkvW7HprFMU uemfGNgj71OmRqe9FK46+aaQMQN8lLKitWR4GhpFBED66mSd/sg9NI+CMd7IwTWHgI5I 5bHUo+6p415htfvbR7yQ8aWyAq1rPHWOphsDdWecT1x3ZvlN7Qi2wjNjU4xogDsvhFU8 d8Vg8re4UdETCbo2fQ9XEWMJ2Wms2gkiQMbJJ61XrUMZrbwnCBGGcAnGywine5oCYqSJ PSwUchJoUWeqyxyRnNcTD6Yx2ew9nD4iXXD5bOCQ50lLlft9/vhiITEYEbTQEIOh+Awn KwSw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKT/WqSzFLoiTvUPETG3nT0YZCnZL57uV3sDbbc3irfIswfRDOFEUW68Smm49Y8Vbo+ X-Received: by 10.28.39.5 with SMTP id n5mr50486960wmn.54.1483367529909; Mon, 02 Jan 2017 06:32:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id di9sm88125455wjc.37.2017.01.02.06.32.09 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 Jan 2017 06:32:09 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Walker, Benjamin" Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Stephen Hemminger Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 15:32:08 +0100 Message-ID: <30911426.SrBqgP6jBN@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20161229171453.57a4326a@xeon-e3> References: <1483044080.11975.1.camel@intel.com> <20161229171453.57a4326a@xeon-e3> 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: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 14:32:10 -0000 2016-12-29 17:14, Stephen Hemminger: > On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 20:41:21 +0000 > "Walker, Benjamin" wrote: > > My second question is whether the user should be allowed to > > mix uio and vfio usage simultaneously. For vfio, the > > physical addresses are really DMA addresses and are best > > when arbitrarily chosen to appear sequential relative to > > their virtual addresses. For uio, they are physical > > addresses and are not chosen at all. It seems that these two > > things are in conflict and that it will be difficult, ugly, > > and maybe impossible to resolve the simultaneous use of > > both. > > Unless application is running as privileged user (ie root), UIO > is not going to work. Therefore don't worry about mixed environment. Yes, mixing UIO and VFIO is possible only as root. However, what is the benefit of mixing them?