On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 02:36:31PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:50:44AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > > I almost wonder if it wouldn't make sense to just partition this up to > > handle flexible resources in the future. Maybe something like having > > the directory setup such that you have "sriov_resources/msix/" and > > then you could have individual files with one for the total and the > > rest with the VF BDF naming scheme. Then if we have to, we could add > > other subdirectories in the future to handle things like queues in the > > future. > > Subdirectories would be nice, but Greg KH said earlier in a different > context that there's an issue with them [1]. He went on to say tools > like udev would miss uevents for the subdirs [2]. > > I don't know whether that's really a problem in this case -- it > doesn't seem like we would care about uevents for files that do MSI-X > vector assignment. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20191121211017.GA854512@xxxxxxxxx/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20191124170207.GA2267252@xxxxxxxxx/ You can only go "one level deep" on subdirectories tied to a 'struct device' and have userspace tools know they are still there. You can do that by giving an attribute group a "name" for the directory. Anything more than that just gets very very messy very quickly and I do not recommend doing that at all. thanks, greg k-h
