Re: nested-smmuv3 topic for QEMU/libvirt, Nov 2024

[Andrea Bolognani]

On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 06:35:23PM +0000, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi wrote:
> I have a bare minimum prototype code that works with a pluggable smmuv3.
>
> ...
> -device pxb-pcie,id=pcie.1,bus_nr=2,bus=pcie.0 \
> -device pcie-root-port,id=pcie.port1,bus=pcie.1 \
> -device arm-smmuv3-nested,id=smmuv1,pci-bus=pcie.1 \
> -device vfio-pci-nohotplug,host=0000:75:00.1,bus=pcie.port1,iommufd=iommufd0 \
> -device pxb-pcie,id=pcie.2,bus_nr=8,bus=pcie.0 \
> -device pcie-root-port,id=pcie.port2,bus=pcie.2,chassis=8 \
> -device arm-smmuv3-nested,id=smmuv2,pci-bus=pcie.2 \
> -device vfio-pci-nohotplug,host=0000:7d:02.1,bus=pcie.port2,iommufd=iommufd0 \

Silly bit of feedback on the interface, but why is the
arm-smmuv3-nested property called "pci-bus" instead of just "bus"?

All other devices that need to refer to an existing PCI bus use the
latter. Is there a reason for this specific one to diverge?

-- 
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization