On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 17:01 +0000, Rose, Gregory V wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Don Dutile [mailto:ddutile@xxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 8:07 AM > > To: Ben Hutchings > > Cc: linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx; yuvalmin@xxxxxxxxxxxx; > > Rose, Gregory V; yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] PCI: sysfs per device SRIOV control and status > > > > > > > Ok, my turn: > > Any feedback on having the sysfs configure call > > pci_sriov_[enable/disable](), as well as do the don't-disable if VFs are > > assigned to guests? > > > > Don, > > As I've mentioned before I still prefer to have the sysfs interface > you've written up make the calls to pci_sriov_enable/disable() I think that would work for sfc, assuming the driver function is to be called before either of those. I don't know whether it would work for any of the other drivers with SR-IOV back-ends, though. > and have the checking for whether the VFs are assigned to guests done > there also, I agree that this is should be centralised, though I think that could be done as a later step without too much pain. > but really it isn't anything worth going to the mats about. As it > stands I think if you address the issues brought up by Ben then I'm > fine with what you've worked up so far. Since no one else seems to > have an opinion about it (as demonstrated by a lack of response over > the last 5 days) then I'd suggest we go forward with the current > implementation. I'd really like to see this in 3.8 if possible. > > Thanks for all your work. Agreed, thanks Don. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
