[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52A6162D.7090008@siemens.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 20:12:45 +0100
From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
To: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@...aro.org>, scottwood@...escale.com
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, R65777@...escale.com, B07421@...escale.com,
B08248@...escale.com, christoffer.dall@...aro.org,
alex.williamson@...hat.com, a.motakis@...tualopensystems.com,
agraf@...e.de, B16395@...escale.com
Subject: Re: [REPOST][PATCH 1/2] driver core: Add new device_driver flag to
allow binding via sysfs only
On 2013-12-09 19:58, Kim Phillips wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 16:38:15 -0600
> Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 17:45 +0000, Kim Phillips wrote:
>>> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:34:33 +0100
>>> Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2013-12-03 13:34, Kim Phillips wrote:
>>>>> VFIO supports pass-through of devices to user space - for sake
>>>>> of illustration, say a PCI e1000 device:
>>>>>
>>>>> - the e1000 is first unbound from the PCI e1000 driver via sysfs
>>>>> - the vfio-pci driver is told via new_id that it now handles e1000 devices
>>>>> - the e1000 is explicitly bound to vfio-pci through sysfs
>>>>>
>>>>> However, now we have two drivers in the system that both handle e1000
>>>>> devices. A hotplug event could then occur and it is ambiguous as to which
>>>>> driver will claim the device. The desired semantics is that vfio-pci is
>>>>> only bound to devices by explicit request in sysfs. This patch makes this
>>>>> possible by introducing a sysfs_bind_only flag in struct device_driver.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@...escale.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@...aro.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> rebased onto 3.13-rc2, and reposted from first submission which
>>>>> recieved no comments:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/11/53
>>>>>
>>>>> drivers/base/dd.c | 5 ++++-
>>>>> include/linux/device.h | 2 ++
>>>>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c
>>>>> index 0605176..b83b16d 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/base/dd.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/base/dd.c
>>>>> @@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ static int __device_attach(struct device_driver *drv, void *data)
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct device *dev = data;
>>>>>
>>>>> - if (!driver_match_device(drv, dev))
>>>>> + if (drv->sysfs_bind_only || !driver_match_device(drv, dev))
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> return driver_probe_device(drv, dev);
>>>>> @@ -476,6 +476,9 @@ static int __driver_attach(struct device *dev, void *data)
>>>>> */
>>>>> int driver_attach(struct device_driver *drv)
>>>>> {
>>>>> + if (drv->sysfs_bind_only)
>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>> +
>>>>> return bus_for_each_dev(drv->bus, NULL, drv, __driver_attach);
>>>>> }
>>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(driver_attach);
>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/device.h b/include/linux/device.h
>>>>> index 952b010..ed441d1 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/linux/device.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/device.h
>>>>> @@ -200,6 +200,7 @@ extern struct klist *bus_get_device_klist(struct bus_type *bus);
>>>>> * @owner: The module owner.
>>>>> * @mod_name: Used for built-in modules.
>>>>> * @suppress_bind_attrs: Disables bind/unbind via sysfs.
>>>>> + * @sysfs_bind_only: Only allow bind/unbind via sysfs.
>>>>> * @of_match_table: The open firmware table.
>>>>> * @acpi_match_table: The ACPI match table.
>>>>> * @probe: Called to query the existence of a specific device,
>>>>> @@ -233,6 +234,7 @@ struct device_driver {
>>>>> const char *mod_name; /* used for built-in modules */
>>>>>
>>>>> bool suppress_bind_attrs; /* disables bind/unbind via sysfs */
>>>>> + bool sysfs_bind_only; /* only allow bind/unbind via sysfs */
>>>>>
>>>>> const struct of_device_id *of_match_table;
>>>>> const struct acpi_device_id *acpi_match_table;
>>>>
>>>> I think I only discussed this with Stuart in person at the KVM Forum:
>>>> Why not deriving the property "sysfs bind only" from the fact that a
>>>> device does wild-card binding? Are there use cases that benefit from
>>>> decoupling both features?
>>>
>>> you mean merge the two new flags sysfs_bind_only and platform driver's
>>> match_any_dev into one new single driver flag, right? good question.
>>
>> What would combining them solve, other than making it more likely that
>> Greg complains about the wildcard because it would no longer be handled
>> at the bus level where all the other matching goes on?
>>
>> They are logically separate things. That doesn't change just because we
>> currently plan to use them together.
>
> Jan? Given the above, what would be the advantage of merging
> sysfs_bind_only and (PCI drivers' PCI_ANY_ID and platform drivers'
> match_any_dev)?
That you cannot configure (likely) meaningless or even harmful (bind-any
+ auto-bind) configurations.
I didn't follow if Greg expressed his opinion on this or a similar
scenario before. If he prefers separate knobs for a certain reason, he
likely wins.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists