On 7/23/2023 7:25 PM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
From: Brett Creeley <bcreeley@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2023 3:10 PM
On 7/21/2023 2:01 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper
caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
From: Brett Creeley <brett.creeley@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2023 6:35 AM
@@ -34,12 +34,13 @@ enum pds_core_vif_types {
#define PDS_DEV_TYPE_CORE_STR "Core"
#define PDS_DEV_TYPE_VDPA_STR "vDPA"
-#define PDS_DEV_TYPE_VFIO_STR "VFio"
+#define PDS_DEV_TYPE_VFIO_STR "vfio"
#define PDS_DEV_TYPE_ETH_STR "Eth"
#define PDS_DEV_TYPE_RDMA_STR "RDMA"
#define PDS_DEV_TYPE_LM_STR "LM"
#define PDS_VDPA_DEV_NAME "."
PDS_DEV_TYPE_VDPA_STR
+#define PDS_LM_DEV_NAME PDS_CORE_DRV_NAME "."
PDS_DEV_TYPE_LM_STR "." PDS_DEV_TYPE_VFIO_STR
then should the name be changed to PDS_VFIO_LM_DEV_NAME?
Or is mentioning *LM* important? what would be the problem to just
use "pds_core.vfio"?
LM is important for the device. I don't plan to change this.
What about in the future VDPA also wants to gain migration support?
with VFIO_STR in the name does it make more sense to at least
define the name as PDS_VFIO_LM_DEV_NAME?
Sure I can rename the define that way.
