[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <25bde3a0-67ea-c01e-b99e-c9323d3a82f7@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 12:26:11 +0300
From: Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@...dia.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
CC: <cohuck@...hat.com>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <aviadye@...dia.com>,
<oren@...dia.com>, <shahafs@...dia.com>, <parav@...dia.com>,
<artemp@...dia.com>, <kwankhede@...dia.com>, <ACurrid@...dia.com>,
<cjia@...dia.com>, <yishaih@...dia.com>, <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
<hch@...radead.org>, <targupta@...dia.com>,
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>, <liulongfang@...wei.com>,
<yan.y.zhao@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] PCI: add matching checks for driver_override
binding
On 6/9/2021 4:27 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 19:45:17 -0300
> Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 03:26:43PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>>> drivers that specifically opt into this feature and the driver now has
>>>> the opportunity to provide a proper match table that indicates what HW
>>>> it can properly support. vfio-pci continues to support everything.
>>> In doing so, this also breaks the new_id method for vfio-pci.
>> Does it? How? The driver_override flag is per match entry not for the
>> entire device so new_id added things will work the same as before as
>> their new match entry's flags will be zero.
> Hmm, that might have been a testing issue; combining driverctl with
> manual new_id testing might have left a driver_override in place.
>
>>> Sorry, with so many userspace regressions, crippling the
>>> driver_override interface with an assumption of such a narrow focus,
>>> creating a vfio specific match flag, I don't see where this can go.
>>> Thanks,
>> On the other hand it overcomes all the objections from the last go
>> round: how userspace figures out which driver to use with
>> driver_override and integrating the universal driver into the scheme.
>>
>> pci_stub could be delt with by marking it for driver_override like
>> vfio_pci.
> By marking it a "vfio driver override"? :-\
Of course not. We'll mark it as "stub driver override".
>
>> But driverctl as a general tool working with any module is not really
>> addressable.
>>
>> Is the only issue the blocking of the arbitary binding? That is not a
>> critical peice of this, IIRC
> We can't break userspace, which means new_id and driver_override need
> to work as they do now. There are scads of driver binding scripts in
> the wild, for vfio-pci and other drivers. We can't assume such a
> narrow scope. Thanks,
>
> Alex
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists