RE: [RFC PATCH 0/5] hw/arm/virt: Add support for user-creatable nested SMMUv3

[Shameerali Kolothum Thodi]

Hi Mostafa,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2024 4:17 PM
> To: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>
> Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org; qemu-devel@nongnu.org;
> eric.auger@redhat.com; peter.maydell@linaro.org; jgg@nvidia.com;
> nicolinc@nvidia.com; ddutile@redhat.com; Linuxarm
> <linuxarm@huawei.com>; Wangzhou (B) <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>;
> jiangkunkun <jiangkunkun@huawei.com>; Jonathan Cameron
> <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>; zhangfei.gao@linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] hw/arm/virt: Add support for user-creatable
> nested SMMUv3
> 
> Hi Shameer,
> 
> On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 12:52:37PM +0000, Shameer Kolothum via wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This series adds initial support for a user-creatable "arm-smmuv3-nested"
> > device to Qemu. At present the Qemu ARM SMMUv3 emulation is per
> machine
> > and cannot support multiple SMMUv3s.
> >
> 
> I had a quick look at the SMMUv3 files, as now SMMUv3 supports nested
> translation emulation, would it make sense to rename this? As AFAIU,
> this is about virt (stage-1) SMMUv3 that is emulated to a guest.
> Including vSMMU or virt would help distinguish the code, as now
> some new function as smmu_nested_realize() looks confusing.

Yes. I have noticed that. We need to call it something else to avoid the 
confusion. Not sure including "virt" is a good idea as it may indicate virt
machine. Probably "acc" as Nicolin suggested to indicate hw accelerated. 
I will think about a better one. Open to suggestions.

Thanks,
Shameer