On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 10:55:40PM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2022 4:27 AM > > > > On Fri, 9 Sep 2022 18:22:47 +0800 > > Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > From: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > and replace kref. With it a 'vfio-dev/vfioX' node is created under the > > > sysfs path of the parent, indicating the device is bound to a vfio > > > driver, e.g.: > > > > > > /sys/devices/pci0000\:6f/0000\:6f\:01.0/vfio-dev/vfio0 > > > > > > It is also a preparatory step toward adding cdev for supporting future > > > device-oriented uAPI. > > > > > > Add Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-vfio-dev. > > > > > > Also take this chance to rename chardev 'vfio' to 'vfio-group' in > > > /proc/devices. > > > > What's the risk/reward here, is this just more aesthetically pleasing > > symmetry vs 'vfio-dev'? The char major number to name association in > > /proc/devices seems pretty obscure, but what due diligence have we done > > to make sure this doesn't break anyone? Thanks, > > I'm not sure whether the content of /proc/devices is considered as ABI. > > @Jason? Ah, I've forgotten why we got here - didn't we have a naming conflict with the new stuff that is being introduced? ABI wise it is not a problem unless there is a real user, I'm not aware of anything scanning /proc, that has been obsoleted by sysfs a long time ago. Jason
