From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <sshukla@mvista.com> Received: from mail-pf0-f170.google.com (mail-pf0-f170.google.com [209.85.192.170]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DED848D9F for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 29 Dec 2015 06:56:53 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pf0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 65so78185137pff.3 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 28 Dec 2015 21:56:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mvista-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=t+tjdrl0d6RMTAr/I/voezSrzmICRxqnBVzYDyGhl4w=; b=RzxbwUNW+iaErUrbJF19dz+RrQyVWr3ED3H5kXA2SQTuEYmfAs1CQcJyGmkkzyBqxI mYE9kyhWE5BkbRisnB8/gvvjMUDIrflzTfb+ITHvW1BwbyrUcCTkyEnPTpHU/+Lq+mnE oEjKgrlLo44Y6l9Mn3mkof/n0VUmeYVqsCZxqsKHcrtgAFQcQohIhWHUUqEmQov+MUXi C4I1T4j6CXBxfqNJMeIAQUwRRcdBLnIklVo7lElTPUGS8TBTgzva0nGAcyUKTzs5qtvi MYTDJZwxqyYgw49UEpueDWLBjnTYFKxn9ETbqapuoDqQ9RJ5dOuFq4WHOFszPYed8Dhf K+lw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=t+tjdrl0d6RMTAr/I/voezSrzmICRxqnBVzYDyGhl4w=; b=fNSuJw6mTMOE9qcBtp+5gMF4x0OAERwKETFm+bli50PHFAGqX525C5FLdWGiABbX07 VmXiuqwlkaC0vmpKs+Z4wkH8UrjIaADLLY+MjD8d0h8TmM3QDxDnKJsXuQ5n3PGAmXGR BjdveR4PuQLvT7IhJ/yM6WCBpzLJvrV+gkxZSRgjJSdHQmjbn3eWtVZG315QufFO+Nwz zS0ldvgiubEeB4RvbrocJrUqnpyweCHpq+Ti+JjHFfilGo/87eTcfQwrmB5bQm8AcvZ6 ScySVqwNTQQ842P71R0xlPhTJvtS0cbSog5snyfHJsWRL53muPSNaaquhAB3HwJeDOvA agXg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkn6/wgj3NsXGQSIUT4qFH+0uHjZL2kVklae4W1iRn26/QTuRjKbxp2E8mBM/uRvRJQ/cMn63xDTH0h9AdkFArLEuZ2CHZR5LbUEDdJU85yKfVzNiI= MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.98.67.155 with SMTP id l27mr25944841pfi.93.1451368613246; Mon, 28 Dec 2015 21:56:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.196.81 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Dec 2015 21:56:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <CAAyOgsbBMd8jsuAiiAuvwS=K84s3TgvCuZS9aWHu7iPZnEPXrQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAAyOgsaMO7V1K8Yxh=Zf-E4iodDevMFG+rRBPgZXBysca9JopA@mail.gmail.com> <2241331.HNmyzf8foi@xps13> <CAAyOgsad_+fD5yNB83UG_JwBhYhJLWoLHCiH0XQb3pxb3AEcdg@mail.gmail.com> <2979402.yeVYlcCDUH@xps13> <CAAyOgsYp8mn5d+bbFxo34AWSxb21kMfv0h_wg7r=mH1NPxHEYQ@mail.gmail.com> <20151218053053.GL29571@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <CAAyOgsbRPMhHo5=-WuRkZzrQfmQQ9ZDHcJbHOPDpLfHJk1nfVA@mail.gmail.com> <20151218082139.GC18863@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <CAAyOgsbBMd8jsuAiiAuvwS=K84s3TgvCuZS9aWHu7iPZnEPXrQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 11:26:53 +0530 Message-ID: <CAAyOgsbTDDCSQ+Qkn5tOpGNc3m1Y6BFH5hLwQ_Fuk3hYM7KAaQ@mail.gmail.com> From: Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: map io resources for non x86 architectures X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 05:56:54 -0000 On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Yuanhan Liu > <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 01:24:41PM +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote: >>> >> I guess we have done enough evaluation / investigation that suggest - >>> >> so to map iopci region to userspace in arch agnostic-way - >>> >> >>> >> # either we need to modify kernel >>> >> - Make sure all the non-x86 arch to support mapping for >>> >> iopci region (i.e. pci_mmap_page_range). I don;t think its a correct >>> >> approach though. >>> >> or >>> >> - include /dev/ioport char-mem device file who could do >>> >> more than byte operation, Note that this implementation does not exist >>> >> in kernel. I could send an RFC to lkml. >>> > >>> > Maybe you could propose the two to lkml, to get some feedbacks from >>> > those kernel/ARM gurus? Please cc me if you do so. >>> > >>> >>> The latter one I already shared old lkml thread, Pl. revisit my v1 0/6 >>> patch [1] and in that refer [2]. >> >> Oops, sorry, a bit busy, that I didn't look at it carefully. My bad, >> anyway. >> >>> Josh has already proposed to lkml but for some reason thread didn't >>> went far. I can restart that discussion giving dpdk use-case as an >>> example/ requirement. >> >> I had a quick go through of the discussion. Both hpa and Arnd seem >> to be fine with the ioctl interface on /dev/port. Have you tried >> that? And if you want to restart it, ioctl might be a better option >> than /dev/ioport, judging from the discussion. >> > > I tried legacy patch and re-writing with ioctl-way; doing changes in > dpdk port as well in kernel, had to test on quite other hw not only > arm64 though! so it will take time for me, I am travelling tomorrow so > bit delayed, We'll post patch to lkml and share dpdk-virtio feedback > perhaps by Monday. > I posted a query about /dev/ioports approach in lkml thread [1], and Arnd suggested to use vfio framework but it looks like vfio too does not map ioresource_io region. Same communicated to Arnd and waiting for his reply. In mean time I like to ask general question; - Has anyone tried vfio/non-iommu approach for virtio pmd driver? If not then Is there any plan? Someone planning to take up. [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/23/145