On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 06:06:37PM -0700, Brett Creeley wrote:
> +static const struct vfio_device_ops
> +pds_vfio_ops = {
> + .name = "pds-vfio",
> + .init = pds_vfio_init_device,
> + .release = vfio_pci_core_release_dev,
> + .open_device = pds_vfio_open_device,
> + .close_device = vfio_pci_core_close_device,
> + .ioctl = vfio_pci_core_ioctl,
> + .device_feature = vfio_pci_core_ioctl_feature,
> + .read = vfio_pci_core_read,
> + .write = vfio_pci_core_write,
> + .mmap = vfio_pci_core_mmap,
> + .request = vfio_pci_core_request,
> + .match = vfio_pci_core_match,
> + .bind_iommufd = vfio_iommufd_physical_bind,
> + .unbind_iommufd = vfio_iommufd_physical_unbind,
> + .attach_ioas = vfio_iommufd_physical_attach_ioas,
> +};
> +
> +const struct vfio_device_ops *
> +pds_vfio_ops_info(void)
> +{
> + return &pds_vfio_ops;
> +}
No reason for a function like this
It is a bit strange to split up the driver files so the registration is in a
different file than the ops implementation.
Jason
