On Tuesday, February 27, 2024 2:56 AM, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 23:50:08 +0800
> Xin Zeng <xin.zeng@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > MAINTAINERS | 8 +
> > drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig | 2 +
> > drivers/vfio/pci/Makefile | 2 +
> > drivers/vfio/pci/intel/qat/Kconfig | 12 +
> > drivers/vfio/pci/intel/qat/Makefile | 3 +
> > drivers/vfio/pci/intel/qat/main.c | 663 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 6 files changed, 690 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/vfio/pci/intel/qat/Kconfig
> > create mode 100644 drivers/vfio/pci/intel/qat/Makefile
> > create mode 100644 drivers/vfio/pci/intel/qat/main.c
> >
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > index 5a4051996f1e..8961c7033b31 100644
> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > @@ -23099,6 +23099,14 @@ S: Maintained
> > F:
> Documentation/networking/device_drivers/ethernet/amd/pds_vfio_pci
> .rst
> > F: drivers/vfio/pci/pds/
> >
> > +VFIO QAT PCI DRIVER
> > +M: Xin Zeng <xin.zeng@xxxxxxxxx>
> > +M: Giovanni Cabiddu <giovanni.cabiddu@xxxxxxxxx>
> > +L: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > +L: qat-linux@xxxxxxxxx
> > +S: Supported
> > +F: drivers/vfio/pci/intel/qat/
> > +
>
> Alphabetical please.
Sure, will update it in next version.
>
> > VFIO PLATFORM DRIVER
> > M: Eric Auger <eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > L: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig b/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig
> > index 18c397df566d..329d25c53274 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig
> > @@ -67,4 +67,6 @@ source "drivers/vfio/pci/pds/Kconfig"
> >
> > source "drivers/vfio/pci/virtio/Kconfig"
> >
> > +source "drivers/vfio/pci/intel/qat/Kconfig"
>
> This will be the first intel vfio-pci variant driver, I don't think we
> need an intel sub-directory just yet.
>
Ok, will update it.
> Tangentially, I think an issue we're running into with
> PCI_DRIVER_OVERRIDE_DEVICE_VFIO is that we require driver_override to
> bind the device and therefore the id_table becomes little more than a
> suggestion. Our QE is already asking, for example, if they should use
> mlx5-vfio-pci for all mlx5 compatible devices.
>
> I wonder if all vfio-pci variant drivers that specify an id_table
> shouldn't include in their probe function:
>
> if (!pci_match_id(pdev, id)) {
> pci_info(pdev, "Incompatible device, disallowing
> driver_override\n");
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
Ok, make sense. According to the late discuss, I will include it in
next version.
> (And yes, I see the irony that vfio introduced driver_override and
> we've created variant drivers that require driver_override and now we
> want to prevent driver_overrides)
>
> Jason, are you seeing any of this as well and do you have a better
> suggestion how we might address the issue? Thanks,
>
> Alex
