qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [PATCH rfcv2 11/18] intel_iommu: Add set/unset_iommu_device callback


From: Duan, Zhenzhong
Subject: RE: [PATCH rfcv2 11/18] intel_iommu: Add set/unset_iommu_device callback
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 06:52:28 +0000


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>
>Subject: Re: [PATCH rfcv2 11/18] intel_iommu: Add
>set/unset_iommu_device callback
>
>
>
>On 2/1/24 08:28, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>> From: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
>>
>> This adds set/unset_iommu_device() implementation in Intel vIOMMU.
>> In set call, a pointer to host IOMMU device info is stored in hash
>> table indexed by PCI BDF.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@intel.com>
>> ---
>>  hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h | 14 +++++++
>>  include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h  |  2 +
>>  hw/i386/intel_iommu.c          | 74
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  3 files changed, 90 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h
>b/hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h
>> index f8cf99bddf..3301f54b35 100644
>> --- a/hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h
>> +++ b/hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h
>> @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@
>>  #ifndef HW_I386_INTEL_IOMMU_INTERNAL_H
>>  #define HW_I386_INTEL_IOMMU_INTERNAL_H
>>  #include "hw/i386/intel_iommu.h"
>> +#include "sysemu/host_iommu_device.h"
>> +#include "hw/vfio/vfio-common.h"
>>
>>  /*
>>   * Intel IOMMU register specification
>> @@ -537,4 +539,16 @@ typedef struct VTDRootEntry VTDRootEntry;
>>  #define VTD_SL_IGN_COM              0xbff0000000000000ULL
>>  #define VTD_SL_TM                   (1ULL << 62)
>>
>> +
>> +typedef struct VTDHostIOMMUDevice {
>> +    IntelIOMMUState *iommu_state;
>> +    PCIBus *bus;
>> +    uint8_t devfn;
>> +    union {
>> +        HostIOMMUDevice *dev;
>> +        IOMMULegacyDevice *ldev;
>> +        IOMMUFDDevice *idev;
>> +    };
>again this looks really weird to me. Why don't we simply have
>
>HostIOMMUDevice *dev;

Sure, will do.

Thanks
Zhenzhong


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]