On 2020/6/2 下午1:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 04:03:02PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:+static void vp_vdpa_set_vq_ready(struct vdpa_device *vdpa, + u16 qid, bool ready) +{ + struct vp_vdpa *vp_vdpa = vdpa_to_vp(vdpa); + + vp_iowrite16(qid, &vp_vdpa->common->queue_select); + vp_iowrite16(ready, &vp_vdpa->common->queue_enable); +} +Looks like this needs to check and just skip the write if ready == 0, right? Of course vdpa core then insists on calling vp_vdpa_get_vq_ready which will warn. Maybe just drop the check from core, move it to drivers which need it? ...
That may work, but it may cause inconsistent semantic for set_vq_ready if we leave it to the driver.
+static const struct pci_device_id vp_vdpa_id_table[] = { + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT_QUMRANET, PCI_ANY_ID) }, + { 0 } +};This looks like it'll create a mess with either virtio pci or vdpa being loaded at random. Maybe just don't specify any IDs for now. Down the road we could get a distinct vendor ID or a range of device IDs for this.
Right, will do. Thanks
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, vp_vdpa_id_table); + +static struct pci_driver vp_vdpa_driver = { + .name = "vp-vdpa", + .id_table = vp_vdpa_id_table, + .probe = vp_vdpa_probe, + .remove = vp_vdpa_remove, +}; + +module_pci_driver(vp_vdpa_driver); + +MODULE_AUTHOR("Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx>"); +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("vp-vdpa"); +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); +MODULE_VERSION("1"); -- 2.20.1
_______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
