On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 06:52:12PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote: > On Tue, 01 Apr 2014 10:28:54 -0600 > Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > The driver_override field allows us to specify the driver for a device > > rather than relying on the driver to provide a positive match of the > > device. This shortcuts the existing process of looking up the vendor > > and device ID, adding them to the driver new_id, binding the device, > > then removing the ID, but it also provides a couple advantages. > > > > First, the above process allows the driver to bind to any device > > matching the new_id for the window where it's enabled. This is often > > not desired, such as the case of trying to bind a single device to a > > meta driver like pci-stub or vfio-pci. Using driver_override we can > > do this deterministically using: > > > > echo pci-stub > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:03:00.0/driver_override > > echo 0000:03:00.0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:03:00.0/driver/unbind > > echo 0000:03:00.0 > /sys/bus/pci/drivers_probe > > > > Previously we could not invoke drivers_probe after adding a device > > to new_id for a driver as we get non-deterministic behavior whether > > the driver we intend or the standard driver will claim the device. > > Now it becomes a deterministic process, only the driver matching > > driver_override will probe the device. > > > > To return the device to the standard driver, we simply clear the > > driver_override and reprobe the device, ex: > > > > echo > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:03:00.0/preferred_driver > > echo 0000:03:00.0 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:03:00.0/driver/unbind > > echo 0000:03:00.0 > /sys/bus/pci/drivers_probe > > > > Another advantage to this approach is that we can specify a driver > > override to force a specific binding or prevent any binding. For > > instance when an IOMMU group is exposed to userspace through VFIO > > we require that all devices within that group are owned by VFIO. > > However, devices can be hot-added into an IOMMU group, in which case > > we want to prevent the device from binding to any driver (preferred > > driver = "none") or perhaps have it automatically bind to vfio-pci. > > With driver_override it's a simple matter for this field to be set > > internally when the device is first discovered to prevent driver > > matches. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > > > Apologies for the exceptionally long cc list, this is a follow-up to > > Stuart's "Subject: mechanism to allow a driver to bind to any device" > > thread. This is effectively a v2 of the proof-of-concept patch I > > posted in that thread. This version changes to use a dummy id struct > > to return on an "override" match, which removes the collateral damage > > and greatly simplifies the patch. This feels fairly well baked for > > PCI and I would expect that platform drivers could do a similar > > implementation. From there perhaps we can discuss whether there's > > any advantage to placing driver_override on struct device. The logic > > for incorporating it into the match still needs to happen per bus > > driver, so it might only contribute to consistency of the show/store > > sysfs attributes to move it up to struct device. Please comment. > > Sounds like Greg likes this approach more than {drv,dev}_sysfs_only. I have made no such judgement, I only pointed out that if you modify/add/remove a sysfs file, it needs to have documentation for it. > The diff below is the result of duplicating and converting this patch > for platform devices, and, indeed, binding a device to the > vfio-platform driver succeeds with: > > echo vfio-platform > /sys/bus/platform/devices/fff51000.ethernet/driver_override > echo fff51000.ethernet > /sys/bus/platform/devices/fff51000.ethernet/driver/unbind > echo fff51000.ethernet > /sys/bus/platform/drivers_probe > > However, it's almost pure duplication modulo the bus match code. The > only other place I can see where to put the common bus check is > drivers/base/base.h:driver_match_device(), which I'm guessing is > off-limits? So should we leave this as per-bus code, and somehow > refactor driver_override_{show,store}? If you can provide a way for this to be done in a bus-independant way, like we did for new_id and the like, I'd be open to reviewing it. greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html