On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 09:13:01AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > So I got anoyed at this as well a while ago and I still think this > > is the wrong way around. > > What I plan to do in future is to have differnt ops returned depending > on if the file is a struct vfio_group or a struct vfio_device, so it > is not entirely pointless like this. Uh, I think that is a rather ugly interface. Why would kvm pass in FDs to both into the same interface. > > > I'd much rather EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL kvm_register_device_ops and > > just let kvm_vfio_ops live in a module than all the symbol_get > > crazyness. We'll need to be careful to deal with unload races > > or just not allow unloading, though. > > This is certainly more complicated - especially considering module > unload - than a single symbol_get(). How do you see the benefit? Because that is the sensible layering - kvm already has an abstract interface for emulated devices. So instead of doing symbol_get magic of some kind we should leverage it. But I can see how that is something you might not want to do for this series. So maybe stick to the individual symbol_gets for now and I'll send a separate series to clean that up? Especially as I have a half-finished series for that from a while ago anyway. > > Jason ---end quoted text---
