Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915/gvt: Move mdev attribute groups into kvmgt module

[Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1460 bytes --]

On 2021.05.13 09:02:49 -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:56:47PM +0800, Zhenyu Wang wrote:
> > On 2021.05.12 09:47:39 -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 10:31:41AM +0800, Zhenyu Wang wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > This need to go into the vfio tree in some way, either directly
> > > > > through it, via rc or otherwise
> > > > 
> > > > As this is only for i915/gvt, once drm/i915 backmerge with linus master,
> > > > it should still go through normal i915/gvt merge path.
> > > 
> > > Don't do this, you will create conflicts with ongoing vfio work.
> > > 
> > 
> > Sure, there always could be conflict, which means you need to rebase onto
> > this cleanup. Would that a problem? 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > I'd want to fix current workaround in 5.13-rc.
> 
> This doesn't seem like a rc candiate to me, but going to -rc is also
> fine.
> 
> > Merging i915/gvt only change through vfio doesn't make sense to me,
> 
> You need to do it to avoid major conflicts for stuff that will go into
> the vfio tree this cycle.

Looks apply to vfio/for-linus is fine, and vfio/next missed gvt change to
apply...but not conflict with any new stuff. Alex, pls let me know if you
have any concern of this.

> 
> VFIO drivers should not be outside drivers/vfio/ in the first place,
> and this shows why.
> 

Well, I can't agree, otherwise that'll be dependency nightmare for device
driver writer. ;)


[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx