On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 7:22 PM Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2023-12-20 at 13:55 +0100, Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> > On Wed, 2023-12-20 at 11:46 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 2:09 AM Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Set vdpa device suspended state on successful suspend. Clear it on
> > > > successful resume and reset.
> > > >
> > > > The state will be locked by the vhost_vdpa mutex. The mutex is taken
> > > > during suspend, resume and reset in vhost_vdpa_unlocked_ioctl. The
> > > > exception is vhost_vdpa_open which does a device reset but that should
> > > > be safe because it can only happen before the other ops.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Suggested-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/vhost/vdpa.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
> > > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c b/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> > > > index b4e8ddf86485..00b4fa8e89f2 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> > > > @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ struct vhost_vdpa {
> > > > int in_batch;
> > > > struct vdpa_iova_range range;
> > > > u32 batch_asid;
> > > > + bool suspended;
> > >
> > > Any reason why we don't do it in the core vDPA device but here?
> > >
> > Not really. I wanted to be safe and not expose it in a header due to locking.
> >
> A few clearer answers for why the state is not added in struct vdpa_device:
> - All the suspend infrastructure is currently only for vhost.
> - If the state would be moved to struct vdpa_device then the cf_lock would have
> to be used. This adds more complexity to the code.
>
> Thanks,
> Dragos
Ok, I'm fine with that.
Thanks
