OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

virtio-dev message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [pci PATCH v7 0/5] Add support for unmanaged SR-IOV

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:54:49PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Alexander Duyck
> <alexander.duyck@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This series is meant to add support for SR-IOV on devices when the VFs are
> > not managed by the kernel. Examples of recent patches attempting to do this
> > include:
> > virto - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10241225/
> > pci-stub - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10109935/
> > vfio - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10103353/
> > uio - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9974031/
> >
> > Since this is quickly blowing up into a multi-driver problem it is probably
> > best to implement this solution as generically as possible.
> >
> > This series is an attempt to do that. What we do with this patch set is
> > provide a generic framework to enable SR-IOV in the case that the PF driver
> > doesn't support managing the VFs itself.
> >
> > I based my patch set originally on the patch by Mark Rustad but there isn't
> > much left after going through and cleaning out the bits that were no longer
> > needed, and after incorporating the feedback from David Miller. At this point
> > the only items to be fully reused was his patch description which is now
> > present in patch 3 of the set.
> >
> > This solution is limited in scope to just adding support for devices that
> > provide no functionality for SR-IOV other than allocating the VFs by
> > calling pci_enable_sriov. Previous sets had included patches for VFIO, but
> > for now I am dropping that as the scope of that work is larger then I
> > think I can take on at this time.
> >
> > v2: Reduced scope back to just virtio_pci and vfio-pci
> >     Broke into 3 patch set from single patch
> >     Changed autoprobe behavior to always set when num_vfs is set non-zero
> > v3: Updated Documentation to clarify when sriov_unmanaged_autoprobe is used
> >     Wrapped vfio_pci_sriov_configure to fix build errors w/o SR-IOV in kernel
> > v4: Dropped vfio-pci patch
> >     Added ena and nvme to drivers now using pci_sriov_configure_unmanaged
> >     Dropped pci_disable_sriov call in virtio_pci to be consistent with ena
> > v5: Dropped sriov_unmanaged_autoprobe and pci_sriov_conifgure_unmanaged
> >     Added new patch that enables pci_sriov_configure_simple
> >     Updated drivers to use pci_sriov_configure_simple
> > v6: Defined pci_sriov_configure_simple as NULL when SR-IOV is not enabled
> >     Updated drivers to drop "#ifdef" checks for IOV
> >     Added pci-pf-stub as place for PF-only drivers to add support
> > v7: Dropped pci_id table explanation from pci-pf-stub driver
> >     Updated pci_sriov_configure_simple to drop need for err value
> >     Fixed comment explaining why pci_sriov_configure_simple is NULL
> >
> Just following up since this has been sitting in patchwork for just
> over a month now
> (https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-pci/list/?series=34034).
> I'm just wondering what the expectation is on getting these pulled
> into the pci tree? I'm assuming that is the best place for these
> patches. Are there any concerns I still need to address or are these
> going to be pulled in at some point, and if so is there any ETA on
> when that will be?
> Thanks.
> - Alex

Sorry I didn't notice you had more questions. I have responded
hopefully explaining my concerns. Summary:

- For virtio we should add this with a feature bit.
- I am worried about security of this for the stub, but I am
  not the maintainer there.


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]