On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 10:48:31PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote: > We should be creating 3 different buses, instead of mdev bus being de-multiplexer of that? > > Hence, depending the device flavour specified, create such device on right bus? > > For example, > $ devlink create subdev pci/0000:05:00.0 flavour virtio name foo subdev_id 1 > $ devlink create subdev pci/0000:05:00.0 flavour mdev <uuid> subdev_id 2 > $ devlink create subdev pci/0000:05:00.0 flavour mlx5 id 1 subdev_id 3 I like the idea of specifying what kind of interface you want at sub device creation time. It fits the driver model pretty well and doesn't require abusing the vfio mdev for binding to a netdev driver. > $ devlink subdev pci/0000:05:00.0/<subdev_id> config <params> > $ echo <respective_device_id> <sysfs_path>/bind Is explicit binding really needed? If you specify a vfio flavour why shouldn't the vfio driver autoload and bind to it right away? That is kind of the point of the driver model... (kind of related, but I don't get while all that GUID and lifecycle stuff in mdev should apply for something like a SF) > Implement power management callbacks also on all above 3 buses? > Abstract out mlx5_bus into more generic virtual bus (vdev bus?) so > that multiple vendors can reuse? In this specific case, why does the SF in mlx5 mode even need a bus? Is it only because of devlink? That would be unfortunate Jason
