On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:53:04 -0300 Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 10:26:17AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > 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 > > > +++ 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. > > I agree we should not use the vendor name > > In general I wonder if this is a bit too specific to PCI, really this > is just review criteria for any driver making a struct vfio_device_ops > implementation, and we have some specific guidance for migration here > as well. > > Like if IBM makes s390 migration drivers all of this applies just as > well even though they are not PCI. Are you volunteering to be a reviewer under drivers/vfio/? Careful, I'll add you ;) What you're saying is true of course and it could be argued that this sort of criteria is true for any new driver, I think the unique thing here that raises it to a point where we want to formalize the breadth of reviews is how significantly lower the bar is to create a device specific driver now that we have a vfio-pci-core library. Shameer's stub driver is 100 LoC. I also expect that the pool of people willing to volunteer to be reviewers for PCI related device specific drivers is large than we might see for arbitrary drivers. > > > +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. > > It happens quite a lot when those people help write the patches too :) This is what "etc" is for, the owners are involved and have endorsed it in some way, that's all we care about. Thanks, Alex
