Adding Juan back into the cc: jjalvare@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx On 10/16/17 10:38 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > "Bryant G. Ly" <bryantly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> On 10/12/17 1:29 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > ... >>> If that's the case, how to you ever bind a driver to these VFs? The >>> changelog says you don't want VF drivers to load *immediately*, so I >>> assume you do want them to load eventually. >>> >> The VF's that get dynamically created within the configure SR-IOV call, >> on the Pseries Platform, wont be matched with a driver. - We do not >> want it to match. >> >> The Power Hypervisor will load the VFs. The VF's will get assigned(by >> the user) > via the HMC or Novalink in this environment which will >> then trigger PHYP to load the VF device node to the device tree. > What about the other "Power Hypervisor"? ie. KVM running on Power. This path is only exercised when configuring SR-IOV for Pseries LPAR, therefore it will not affect PowerNV or KVM(opal). Which is the reason for the separation of calls to the machine dependent stuff. > We also use the pseries platform when running under KVM. > > cheers > If anyone plans to enable SR-IOV on Pseries platform, firmware must provide the resources to enable the VFs and map them with system resources. A new version of the PAPR Document will be added to document these system resources. Lastly, we were not aware that there is an intention to enable SR-IOV in adapters assigned to a VM with Pseries running on KVM. Furthermore, this could be left as a todo for the future if this type of configuration is needed. -Bryant
