[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180313085442.GA1537@lst.de>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:54:42 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
bhelgaas@...gle.com, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, dan.daly@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
keith.busch@...el.com, netanel@...zon.com, mheyne@...zon.de,
liang-min.wang@...el.com, mark.d.rustad@...el.com
Subject: Re: [pci PATCH v5 3/4] ena: Migrate over to unmanaged SR-IOV
support
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 08:45:19AM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 09:16 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 08:12:52AM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > >
> > > I'd also *really* like to see a way to enable this for PFs which don't
> > > have (and don't need) a driver. We seem to have lost that along the
> > > way.
> > We've been forth and back on that. I agree that not having any driver
> > just seems dangerous. If your PF really does nothing we should just
> > have a trivial pf_stub driver that does nothing but wiring up
> > pci_sriov_configure_simple. We can then add PCI IDs to it either
> > statically, or using the dynamic ids mechanism.
>
> Or just add it to the existing pci-stub. What's the point in having a
> new driver?
Because binding to pci-stub means that you'd now enable the simple
SR-IOV for any device bound to PCI stub. Which often might be the wrong
thing.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists