[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210603112347.GO1002214@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 08:23:47 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
Cc: "Alex Williamson (alex.williamson@...hat.com)"
<alex.williamson@...hat.com>, Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"Dey, Megha" <megha.dey@...el.com>,
"Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, "Lu, Baolu" <baolu.lu@...el.com>,
"Kumar, Sanjay K" <sanjay.k.kumar@...el.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/20] Add VFIO mediated device support and DEV-MSI
support for the idxd driver
On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 05:52:58AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 3, 2021 9:50 AM
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 01:11:37AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> >
> > > Jason, can you clarify your attitude on mdev guid stuff? Are you
> > > completely against it or case-by-case? If the former, this is a big
> > > decision thus it's better to have consensus with Alex/Kirti. If the
> > > latter, would like to hear your criteria for when it can be used
> > > and when not...
> >
> > I dislike it generally, but it exists so <shrug>. I know others feel
> > more strongly about it being un-kernely and the wrong way to use sysfs.
> >
> > Here I was remarking how the example in the cover letter made the mdev
> > part seem totally pointless. If it is pointless then don't do it.
>
> Is your point about that as long as a mdev requires pre-config
> through driver specific sysfs then it doesn't make sense to use
> mdev guid interface anymore?
Yes
> The value of mdev guid interface is providing a vendor-agnostic
> interface for mdev life-cycle management which allows one-
> enable-fit-all in upper management stack. Requiring vendor
> specific pre-config does blur the boundary here.
It isn't even vendor-agnostic - understanding the mdev_type
configuration stuff is still vendor specific.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists