This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC] [PATCH] xen, vtd: Check ownership of a domain cont

To: "George Dunlap" <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC] [PATCH] xen, vtd: Check ownership of a domain context using internal structures
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 18:50:36 +0100
Cc: Jiang Yunhong <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:51:11 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CAFLBxZYT++S8-3gPYAys5gum=UauiZQ6_KfDhHZ85gqZnkYM8A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <CAFLBxZatO6Pih1KcsVovs6g1o6Ux1fSUwGmS-xDmTQaTWf61uw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <CAFLBxZYT++S8-3gPYAys5gum=UauiZQ6_KfDhHZ85gqZnkYM8A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> On 27.07.11 at 12:52, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> And in a related note...
> What is the implication of the "Devices on a bus behind a bridge look
> like they're coming from X:0.0" for passing virtual functions through
> to different VMs?  Will it simply not work (since the mapping of X:0.0
> can't be owned by both)?  Is there a way it can be made to work
> without allowing the virtual function of one domain access to the
> memory of the other domain?

No, that can't afaik - these devices are required to be PCIe, and the
issue here only applies to traditional PCI bridges (and I don't think PCIe
devices can sit behind one, or if they can, the code isn't prepared to
deal with that anyway).


Xen-devel mailing list