Re: [PATCH 0/4] ifcvf/vDPA implement features provisioning

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




在 2022/11/10 14:20, Zhu, Lingshan 写道:


On 11/10/2022 11:49 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 5:06 PM Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


On 11/9/2022 4:59 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 4:14 PM Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 11/9/2022 2:51 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 5:42 PM Zhu Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This series implements features provisioning for ifcvf.
By applying this series, we allow userspace to create
a vDPA device with selected (management device supported)
feature bits and mask out others.
I don't see a direct relationship between the first 3 and the last.
Maybe you can state the reason why the restructure is a must for the
feature provisioning. Otherwise, we'd better split the series.
When introducing features provisioning ability to ifcvf, there is a need
to re-create vDPA devices
on a VF with different feature bits.
This seems a requirement even without feature provisioning? Device
could be deleted from the management device anyhow.
Yes, we need this to delete and re-create a vDPA device.
I wonder if we need something that works for -stable.
I can add a fix tag, so these three patches could apply to stable


It's too huge for -stable.



AFAIK, we can move the vdpa_alloc_device() from probe() to dev_add()
and it seems to work?
Yes and this is done in this series and that's why we need these
refactoring code.


I meant there's probably no need to change the association of existing structure but just do the allocation in dev_add(), then we will have a patch with much more small changeset that fit for -stable.

Thanks



By the way, do you have any comments to the patches?

Thanks,
Zhu Lingshan

Thanks

We create vDPA device from a VF, so without features provisioning
requirements,
we don't need to re-create the vDPA device. But with features provisioning,
it is a must now.

Thanks


Thakns

When remove a vDPA device, the container of struct vdpa_device (here is
ifcvf_adapter) is free-ed in
dev_del() interface, so we need to allocate ifcvf_adapter in dev_add()
than in probe(). That's
why I have re-factored the adapter/mgmt_dev code.

For re-factoring the irq related code and ifcvf_base, let them work on
struct ifcvf_hw, the
reason is that the adapter is allocated in dev_add(), if we want theses
functions to work
before dev_add(), like in probe, we need them work on ifcvf_hw than the
adapter.

Thanks
Zhu Lingshan
Thanks

Please help review

Thanks

Zhu Lingshan (4):
     vDPA/ifcvf: ifcvf base layer interfaces work on struct ifcvf_hw
     vDPA/ifcvf: IRQ interfaces work on ifcvf_hw
     vDPA/ifcvf: allocate ifcvf_adapter in dev_add()
     vDPA/ifcvf: implement features provisioning

    drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.c |  32 ++-----
    drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.h |  10 +-
    drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c | 156 +++++++++++++++-----------------
    3 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 109 deletions(-)

--
2.31.1






[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux