On Mon, Mar 14 2022, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Vendor or device specific extensions for devices exposed to userspace > through the vfio-pci-core library open both new functionality and new > risks. Here we attempt to provided formalized requirements and > expectations to ensure that future drivers both collaborate in their > interaction with existing host drivers, as well as receive additional > reviews from community members with experience in this area. > > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- (...) > diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/vfio-pci-vendor-driver-acceptance.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/vfio-pci-vendor-driver-acceptance.rst > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..3a108d748681 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/vfio-pci-vendor-driver-acceptance.rst What about Christoph's request to drop the "vendor" name? vfio-pci-device-specific-driver-acceptance.rst would match the actual title of the document, and the only drawback I see is that it is a bit longer. > @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ > +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > + > +Acceptance criteria for vfio-pci device specific driver variants > +================================================================ > + > +Overview > +-------- > +The vfio-pci driver exists as a device agnostic driver using the > +system IOMMU and relying on the robustness of platform fault > +handling to provide isolated device access to userspace. While the > +vfio-pci driver does include some device specific support, further > +extensions for yet more advanced device specific features are not > +sustainable. The vfio-pci driver has therefore split out > +vfio-pci-core as a library that may be reused to implement features > +requiring device specific knowledge, ex. saving and loading device > +state for the purposes of supporting migration. > + > +In support of such features, it's expected that some device specific > +variants may interact with parent devices (ex. SR-IOV PF in support of > +a user assigned VF) or other extensions that may not be otherwise > +accessible via the vfio-pci base driver. Authors of such drivers > +should be diligent not to create exploitable interfaces via such > +interactions or allow unchecked userspace data to have an effect > +beyond the scope of the assigned device. > + > +New driver submissions are therefore requested to have approval via > +Sign-off/Acked-by/etc for any interactions with parent drivers. s/Sign-off/Reviewed-by/ ? I would not generally expect the reviewers listed to sign off on other people's patches. > +Additionally, drivers should make an attempt to provide sufficient > +documentation for reviewers to understand the device specific > +extensions, for example in the case of migration data, how is the > +device state composed and consumed, which portions are not otherwise > +available to the user via vfio-pci, what safeguards exist to validate > +the data, etc. To that extent, authors should additionally expect to > +require reviews from at least one of the listed reviewers, in addition > +to the overall vfio maintainer. > diff --git a/Documentation/maintainer/maintainer-entry-profile.rst b/Documentation/maintainer/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > index 5d5cc3acdf85..8b4971c7e3fa 100644 > --- a/Documentation/maintainer/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > +++ b/Documentation/maintainer/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > @@ -103,3 +103,4 @@ to do something different in the near future. > ../nvdimm/maintainer-entry-profile > ../riscv/patch-acceptance > ../driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile > + ../driver-api/vfio-pci-vendor-driver-acceptance > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index 4322b5321891..fd17d1891216 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -20314,6 +20314,16 @@ F: drivers/vfio/mdev/ > F: include/linux/mdev.h > F: samples/vfio-mdev/ > > +VFIO PCI VENDOR DRIVERS VFIO PCI DEVICE SPECIFIC DRIVERS ? > +R: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx> > +R: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@xxxxxxxxxx> > +R: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@xxxxxxxxxx> > +R: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> > +L: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > +S: Maintained > +P: Documentation/driver-api/vfio-pci-vendor-driver-acceptance.rst > +F: drivers/vfio/pci/*/ > + > VFIO PLATFORM DRIVER > M: Eric Auger <eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx> > L: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Other than that, looks good to me (and thanks to the people volunteering for review!)
