| Message ID | 20211210170415.583179-1-jean-philippe@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | virtio-iommu: Add ACPI support (Arm part + tests) | expand |
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 10:35 PM Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > Add ACPI support for virtio-iommu on the virt machine, by instantiating > a VIOT table. Also add the tests for the ACPI table. > > Since last posting [1], I rebased onto v6.2.0-rc4. Note that v6 of this > series [2] only contained the table and x86 support, which have been > merged. Everything has now been reviewed and should be good to go. > > * Patches 1-2 add the VIOT table for the virt machine > * Patches 3-4 are minor fixes > * Patches 5-8 add tests for the VIOT table. They contain the tests for > q35 as well, which didn't make it last time because they depended on > another fix that has now been merged. I believe the entire patchset has been reviewed and you are re-sending it so that it gets pulled in after the release? > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20211020172745.620101-1-jean-philippe@linaro.org/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20211026182024.2642038-1-jean-philippe@linaro.org/ > > Jean-Philippe Brucker (8): > hw/arm/virt-acpi-build: Add VIOT table for virtio-iommu > hw/arm/virt: Remove device tree restriction for virtio-iommu > hw/arm/virt: Reject instantiation of multiple IOMMUs > hw/arm/virt: Use object_property_set instead of qdev_prop_set > tests/acpi: allow updates of VIOT expected data files > tests/acpi: add test case for VIOT > tests/acpi: add expected blobs for VIOT test on q35 machine > tests/acpi: add expected blob for VIOT test on virt machine > > hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c | 7 ++++++ > hw/arm/virt.c | 20 ++++++++--------- > hw/virtio/virtio-iommu-pci.c | 12 ++--------- > tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > hw/arm/Kconfig | 1 + > tests/data/acpi/q35/DSDT.viot | Bin 0 -> 9398 bytes > tests/data/acpi/q35/VIOT.viot | Bin 0 -> 112 bytes > tests/data/acpi/virt/VIOT | Bin 0 -> 88 bytes > 8 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/DSDT.viot > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/VIOT.viot > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/VIOT > > -- > 2.34.1 >
On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 10:19:47AM +0530, Ani Sinha wrote: > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 10:35 PM Jean-Philippe Brucker > <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > Add ACPI support for virtio-iommu on the virt machine, by instantiating > > a VIOT table. Also add the tests for the ACPI table. > > > > Since last posting [1], I rebased onto v6.2.0-rc4. Note that v6 of this > > series [2] only contained the table and x86 support, which have been > > merged. Everything has now been reviewed and should be good to go. > > > > * Patches 1-2 add the VIOT table for the virt machine > > * Patches 3-4 are minor fixes > > * Patches 5-8 add tests for the VIOT table. They contain the tests for > > q35 as well, which didn't make it last time because they depended on > > another fix that has now been merged. > > I believe the entire patchset has been reviewed and you are re-sending > it so that it gets pulled in after the release? Yes Thanks, Jean
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 09:28, Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 10:19:47AM +0530, Ani Sinha wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 10:35 PM Jean-Philippe Brucker > > <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > Add ACPI support for virtio-iommu on the virt machine, by instantiating > > > a VIOT table. Also add the tests for the ACPI table. > > > > > > Since last posting [1], I rebased onto v6.2.0-rc4. Note that v6 of this > > > series [2] only contained the table and x86 support, which have been > > > merged. Everything has now been reviewed and should be good to go. > > > > > > * Patches 1-2 add the VIOT table for the virt machine > > > * Patches 3-4 are minor fixes > > > * Patches 5-8 add tests for the VIOT table. They contain the tests for > > > q35 as well, which didn't make it last time because they depended on > > > another fix that has now been merged. > > > > I believe the entire patchset has been reviewed and you are re-sending > > it so that it gets pulled in after the release? > > Yes To be clear, do you mean: (1) The patchset has been reviewed, and I plan to resend it (ie a v8) to be pulled in after 6.2 releases or (2) The patchset has been reviewed already as v6, and this (v7) was just a resend to be pulled in after 6.2 releases ? thanks -- PMM
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:04:57AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 09:28, Jean-Philippe Brucker > <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 10:19:47AM +0530, Ani Sinha wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 10:35 PM Jean-Philippe Brucker > > > <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Add ACPI support for virtio-iommu on the virt machine, by instantiating > > > > a VIOT table. Also add the tests for the ACPI table. > > > > > > > > Since last posting [1], I rebased onto v6.2.0-rc4. Note that v6 of this > > > > series [2] only contained the table and x86 support, which have been > > > > merged. Everything has now been reviewed and should be good to go. > > > > > > > > * Patches 1-2 add the VIOT table for the virt machine > > > > * Patches 3-4 are minor fixes > > > > * Patches 5-8 add tests for the VIOT table. They contain the tests for > > > > q35 as well, which didn't make it last time because they depended on > > > > another fix that has now been merged. > > > > > > I believe the entire patchset has been reviewed and you are re-sending > > > it so that it gets pulled in after the release? > > > > Yes > > To be clear, do you mean: > (1) The patchset has been reviewed, and I plan to resend it (ie a v8) > to be pulled in after 6.2 releases > or > (2) The patchset has been reviewed already as v6, and this (v7) was just > a resend to be pulled in after 6.2 releases I meant (2), v6 had already been reviewed and I'm resending v7 to be pulled after 6.2 releases, sorry about the confusion. Just for my understanding, should I have resent this after the 6.2 release, or is this OK and I should just state the intention for a patchset more clearly? Thanks, Jean
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 10:56, Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:04:57AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 09:28, Jean-Philippe Brucker > > <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 10:19:47AM +0530, Ani Sinha wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 10:35 PM Jean-Philippe Brucker > > > > <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Add ACPI support for virtio-iommu on the virt machine, by instantiating > > > > > a VIOT table. Also add the tests for the ACPI table. > > > > > > > > > > Since last posting [1], I rebased onto v6.2.0-rc4. Note that v6 of this > > > > > series [2] only contained the table and x86 support, which have been > > > > > merged. Everything has now been reviewed and should be good to go. > > > > > > > > > > * Patches 1-2 add the VIOT table for the virt machine > > > > > * Patches 3-4 are minor fixes > > > > > * Patches 5-8 add tests for the VIOT table. They contain the tests for > > > > > q35 as well, which didn't make it last time because they depended on > > > > > another fix that has now been merged. > > > > > > > > I believe the entire patchset has been reviewed and you are re-sending > > > > it so that it gets pulled in after the release? > > > > > > Yes > > > > To be clear, do you mean: > > (1) The patchset has been reviewed, and I plan to resend it (ie a v8) > > to be pulled in after 6.2 releases > > or > > (2) The patchset has been reviewed already as v6, and this (v7) was just > > a resend to be pulled in after 6.2 releases > > I meant (2), v6 had already been reviewed and I'm resending v7 to be > pulled after 6.2 releases, sorry about the confusion. Just for my > understanding, should I have resent this after the 6.2 release, or is this > OK and I should just state the intention for a patchset more clearly? Sending for-7.0 patchsets before 6.2 officially releases is fine; I just wanted to check what you intended. I've queued this patchset to target-arm.next. thanks -- PMM
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 11:07:38AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 10:56, Jean-Philippe Brucker > <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:04:57AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > > > On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 09:28, Jean-Philippe Brucker > > > <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 10:19:47AM +0530, Ani Sinha wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 10:35 PM Jean-Philippe Brucker > > > > > <jean-philippe@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Add ACPI support for virtio-iommu on the virt machine, by instantiating > > > > > > a VIOT table. Also add the tests for the ACPI table. > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last posting [1], I rebased onto v6.2.0-rc4. Note that v6 of this > > > > > > series [2] only contained the table and x86 support, which have been > > > > > > merged. Everything has now been reviewed and should be good to go. > > > > > > > > > > > > * Patches 1-2 add the VIOT table for the virt machine > > > > > > * Patches 3-4 are minor fixes > > > > > > * Patches 5-8 add tests for the VIOT table. They contain the tests for > > > > > > q35 as well, which didn't make it last time because they depended on > > > > > > another fix that has now been merged. > > > > > > > > > > I believe the entire patchset has been reviewed and you are re-sending > > > > > it so that it gets pulled in after the release? > > > > > > > > Yes > > > > > > To be clear, do you mean: > > > (1) The patchset has been reviewed, and I plan to resend it (ie a v8) > > > to be pulled in after 6.2 releases > > > or > > > (2) The patchset has been reviewed already as v6, and this (v7) was just > > > a resend to be pulled in after 6.2 releases > > > > I meant (2), v6 had already been reviewed and I'm resending v7 to be > > pulled after 6.2 releases, sorry about the confusion. Just for my > > understanding, should I have resent this after the 6.2 release, or is this > > OK and I should just state the intention for a patchset more clearly? > > Sending for-7.0 patchsets before 6.2 officially releases is fine; I just wanted > to check what you intended. I've queued this patchset to target-arm.next. Great, thank you! Jean
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 05:04:08PM +0000, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: > Add ACPI support for virtio-iommu on the virt machine, by instantiating > a VIOT table. Also add the tests for the ACPI table. ACPI parts: Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > Since last posting [1], I rebased onto v6.2.0-rc4. Note that v6 of this > series [2] only contained the table and x86 support, which have been > merged. Everything has now been reviewed and should be good to go. > > * Patches 1-2 add the VIOT table for the virt machine > * Patches 3-4 are minor fixes > * Patches 5-8 add tests for the VIOT table. They contain the tests for > q35 as well, which didn't make it last time because they depended on > another fix that has now been merged. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20211020172745.620101-1-jean-philippe@linaro.org/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20211026182024.2642038-1-jean-philippe@linaro.org/ > > Jean-Philippe Brucker (8): > hw/arm/virt-acpi-build: Add VIOT table for virtio-iommu > hw/arm/virt: Remove device tree restriction for virtio-iommu > hw/arm/virt: Reject instantiation of multiple IOMMUs > hw/arm/virt: Use object_property_set instead of qdev_prop_set > tests/acpi: allow updates of VIOT expected data files > tests/acpi: add test case for VIOT > tests/acpi: add expected blobs for VIOT test on q35 machine > tests/acpi: add expected blob for VIOT test on virt machine > > hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c | 7 ++++++ > hw/arm/virt.c | 20 ++++++++--------- > hw/virtio/virtio-iommu-pci.c | 12 ++--------- > tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > hw/arm/Kconfig | 1 + > tests/data/acpi/q35/DSDT.viot | Bin 0 -> 9398 bytes > tests/data/acpi/q35/VIOT.viot | Bin 0 -> 112 bytes > tests/data/acpi/virt/VIOT | Bin 0 -> 88 bytes > 8 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/DSDT.viot > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/VIOT.viot > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/virt/VIOT > > -- > 2.34.1