> From: Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 9:36 AM
>
>
> On 2021/1/4 下午3:21, Parav Pandit wrote:
> >
> >> From: Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Monday, January 4, 2021 12:35 PM
> >>
> >> On 2021/1/4 上午11:31, Parav Pandit wrote:
> >>> static int __init vdpasim_net_init(void)
> >>> {
> >>> int ret = 0;
> >>> @@ -176,6 +264,8 @@ static int __init vdpasim_net_init(void)
> >>>
> >>> if (default_device)
> >>> ret = vdpasim_net_default_dev_register();
> >>> + else
> >>> + ret = vdpasim_net_mgmtdev_init();
> >>> return ret;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> @@ -183,6 +273,8 @@ static void __exit vdpasim_net_exit(void)
> >>> {
> >>> if (default_device)
> >>> vdpasim_net_default_dev_unregister();
> >>> + else
> >>> + vdpasim_net_mgmtdev_cleanup();
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> module_init(vdpasim_net_init);
> >>> -- 2.26.2
> >>
> >> I wonder what's the value of keeping the default device that is out
> >> of the control of management API.
> > I think we can remove it like how I did in the v1 version. And actual vendor
> drivers like mlx5_vdpa will likely should do only user created devices.
> > I added only for backward compatibility purpose, but we can remove the
> default simulated vdpa net device.
> > What do you recommend?
>
>
> I think we'd better mandate this management API. This can avoid vendor
> specific configuration that may complex management layer.
>
Sounds good.
I will drop the patch that allows vdpasim_net default device via module parameter. Will post v3 with that removal.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
