On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 03:57:14AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Friday, April 15, 2022 2:46 AM > > > > kvm and VFIO need to be coupled together however neither is willing to > > tolerate a direct module dependency. Instead when kvm is given a VFIO FD > > it uses many symbol_get()'s to access VFIO. > > > > Provide a single VFIO function vfio_file_get_ops() which validates the > > given struct file * is a VFIO file and then returns a struct of ops. > > VFIO has multiple files (container, group, and device). Here and other > places seems to assume a VFIO file is just a group file. While it is correct > in this external facing context, probably calling it 'VFIO group file' is > clearer in various code comments and patch descriptions. > > > > > Following patches will redo each of the symbol_get() calls into an > > indirection through this ops struct. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> > > Out of curiosity, how do you envision when iommufd is introduced? > Will we need a generic ops abstraction so both vfio and iommufd > register their own ops to keep kvm side generic or a new protocol > will be introduced between iommufd and kvm? I imagine using the vfio_device in all these context where the vfio group is used, not iommufd. This keeps everything internal to vfio. Jason
