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

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC] Add SUPPORT.md


Sorry I missed e-mail. It seems I was not CCed on it.

On 07/09/17 22:36, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
+### ARM/Non-PCI device passthrough
+    Status: Supported

I guess non-pci devices on ARM also use the IOMMU? (SMMU)

Yes, they do.

+    Status: Supported, with caveats
+Only ARM SMMU hardware is supported; non-ARM SMMU hardware is not supported.

I'm not sure of the purpose of this sentence, it's quite clear that
the SMMU is only supported if available. Also, I'm not sure this
should be spelled out in this document, x86 doesn't have a VT-d or SVM

As George wrote, there are many SMMUs in the market for ARM based
platforms, not all of them of ARM design.

Few remarks here.

Firstly, what do you mean by Arm design? Is it spec compliant (i.e SMMUv1, SMMUv2, SMMUv3) ? Or is it implementation coming from Arm (SMMU-400, SMMU-401, SMMU-500,...)?

At the moment we have no support of SMMUv3 at all (this would be a separate driver as the spec is very different).

Regarding SMMUv1 and SMMUv2. Technically we should support all SMMUs which are compliant with the spec, providing there are no workaround necessary (yes there are some hardware only 99.9% compliant).

But, we can't even claim that we support Arm implementation. At least SMMU-401 (used by Seattle and Versatile Express) is not supported.

Furthermore, Arm may release new IP in the future. Does it mean we support them by default?

So there are some clarifications needed on what we actually support.

If we decide the support status is based on hardware, then it raise the questions on what about other specifications (e.g GICv2, GICv3, GICv4)? Each vendor is free to provide its own implementation (not necessarily bug free and fully compliant).


Julien Grall

Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.