On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 05:39:02AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > From: Kirti Wankhede > > Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 12:24 AM > > > > Signed-off-by: Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Neo Jia <cjia@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Hi, Kirti/Neo, > > Thanks a lot for you updated version. Having not looked into detail > code, first come with some high level comments. > > First, in a glimpse the majority of the code (possibly >95%) is device > agnostic, though we call it vgpu today. Just thinking about the > extensibility and usability of this framework, would it be better to > name it in a way that any other type of I/O device can be fit into > this framework? I don't have a good idea of the name now, but > a simple idea is to replace vgpu with vdev (vdev-core, vfio-vdev, > vfio-iommu-type1-vdev, etc.), and then underlying GPU drivers are > just one category of users of this general vdev framework. In the > future it's easily extended to support other I/O virtualization based > on similar vgpu concept; > > Second, are these 3 patches already working with nvidia device, > or are they just conceptual implementation w/o completing actual > test yet? We'll start moving our implementation toward this direction > too, so would be good to know the current status and how we can > further cooperate to move forward. Based on that we can start > giving more comments on next level detail. > Hi Kevin, Yes, we do have an engineering prototype up and running with this set of kernel patches we have posted. Please let us know if you have any questions while integrating your vgpu solution within this framework. Thanks, Neo > Thanks > Kevin -- 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
