[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191120130319.GA22515@ziepe.ca>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 09:03:19 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>,
Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Dave Ertman <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"nhorman@...hat.com" <nhorman@...hat.com>,
"sassmann@...hat.com" <sassmann@...hat.com>,
Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@...el.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"Bie, Tiwei" <tiwei.bie@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next v2 1/1] virtual-bus: Implementation of Virtual Bus
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 02:38:08AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > I don't think that extends as far as actively encouraging userspace
> > > drivers poking at hardware in a vendor specific way.
> >
> > Yes, it does, if you can implement your user space requirements using
> > vfio then why do you need a kernel driver?
>
> People's requirements differ. You are happy with just pass through a VF
> you can already use it. Case closed. There are enough people who have
> a fixed userspace that people have built virtio accelerators,
> now there's value in supporting that, and a vendor specific
> userspace blob is not supporting that requirement.
I have no idea what you are trying to explain here. I'm not advocating
for vfio pass through.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists