Re: [RFC 00/29] Introduce NVIDIA GPU Virtualization (vGPU) Support

[Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>]

On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 06:43:44AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:

> Then there comes an open whether VFIO is a right place to host such
> vendor specific provisioning interface. The existing mdev type based
> provisioning mechanism was considered a bad fit already.

> IIRC the previous discussion came to suggest putting the provisioning
> interface in the PF driver. There may be chance to generalize and
> move to VFIO but no idea what it will be until multiple drivers already
> demonstrate their own implementations as the base for discussion.

I am looking at fwctl do to alot of this in the SRIOV world.

You'd provision the VF prior to opening VFIO using the fwctl interface
and the VFIO would perceive a VF that has exactly the required
properties. At least for SRIOV where the VM is talking directly to
device FW, mdev/paravirtualization would be different.

> But now seems you prefer to vendors putting their own provisioning
> interface in VFIO directly?

Maybe not, just that drm isn't the right place either. If the we do
fwctl stuff then the VF provisioning would be done through a fwctl
driver.

I'm not entirely sure yet what this whole 'mgr' component is actually
doing though.

Jason