RE: [PATCH v16 00/10] VIRTIO-IOMMU device

[Tian, Kevin]

> From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <address@hidden>
> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 3:34 PM
> 
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 02:56:20AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <address@hidden>
> > > Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 12:47 AM
> > >
> > [...]
> > > > >
> > > > > * We can't use DVM in nested mode unless the VMID is shared with
> the
> > > > > CPU. For that we'll need the host SMMU driver to hook into the KVM
> > > VMID
> > > > > allocator, just like we do for the ASID allocator. I haven't yet
> > > > > investigated how to do that. It's possible to do vSVA without DVM
> > > > > though, by sending all TLB invalidations through the SMMU command
> > > queue.
> > > > > "
> > >
> > > Hm we're already mandating DVM for host SVA, so I'd say mandate it for
> > > vSVA as well. We'd avoid a ton of context switches, especially for the zip
> > > accelerator which doesn't require ATC invalidations. The host needs to
> pin
> > > the VMID allocated by KVM and write it in the endpoint's STE.
> > >
> >
> > Curious... what is DVM and how is it related to SVA? Is it SMMU specific?
> 
> Yes it stands for "Distributed Virtual Memory", an Arm interconnect
> protocol. When sharing a process address space, TLB invalidations from the
> CPU are broadcasted to the SMMU, so we don't have to send commands
> through
> the SMMU queue to invalidate IOTLBs. However ATCs from PCIe endpoints
> do
> not participate in DVM and still have to be invalidated by hand.
> 

ah, got it. Thanks for explanation!