[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250731164603.GX26511@ziepe.ca>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2025 13:46:03 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aik@....com, lukas@...ner.de,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...osinc.com>,
Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...ux.intel.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>,
Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 11/38] KVM: arm64: CCA: register host tsm platform
device
On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 02:22:50PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> If you mean create a class device with no parent, that's also something
> we are slowly trying to fix. Reminds me that fixing up more perf devices
> is still on my todo list.
IIRC if you create a class device with no parent it gets placed on the
virtual bus...
Do you mean we should not do that?
> Should be a child of something, so maybe that is a good reason for a
> faux_device here if there is nothing else to use.
Don't see such a big difference to have it be the child of a faux
device on the faux bus than to just be directly on the virtual bus?
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists