From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jike Song Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] vGPU Core driver Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:10:50 +0800 Message-ID: <56D5083A.3000205@intel.com> References: <1456244666-25369-1-git-send-email-kwankhede@nvidia.com> <20160229231757.GA19330@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Tian, Kevin" , Kirti Wankhede , "alex.williamson@redhat.com" , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "kraxel@redhat.com" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "Ruan, Shuai" , "Lv, Zhiyuan" To: Neo Jia Return-path: Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:7760 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751353AbcCADKy (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Feb 2016 22:10:54 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20160229231757.GA19330@nvidia.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/01/2016 07:17 AM, Neo Jia wrote: > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 05:39:02AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: >>> From: Kirti Wankhede >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 12:24 AM >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Kirti Wankhede >>> Signed-off-by: Neo Jia >> >> Hi, Kirti/Neo, >> >> Thanks a lot for you updated version. Having not looked into detail >> code, first come with some high level comments. >> >> First, in a glimpse the majority of the code (possibly >95%) is device >> agnostic, though we call it vgpu today. Just thinking about the >> extensibility and usability of this framework, would it be better to >> name it in a way that any other type of I/O device can be fit into >> this framework? I don't have a good idea of the name now, but >> a simple idea is to replace vgpu with vdev (vdev-core, vfio-vdev, >> vfio-iommu-type1-vdev, etc.), and then underlying GPU drivers are >> just one category of users of this general vdev framework. In the >> future it's easily extended to support other I/O virtualization based >> on similar vgpu concept; >> >> Second, are these 3 patches already working with nvidia device, >> or are they just conceptual implementation w/o completing actual >> test yet? We'll start moving our implementation toward this direction >> too, so would be good to know the current status and how we can >> further cooperate to move forward. Based on that we can start >> giving more comments on next level detail. >> > > Hi Kevin, > > Yes, we do have an engineering prototype up and running with this set of kernel > patches we have posted. > Good to know that :) > Please let us know if you have any questions while integrating your vgpu solution > within this framework. Thanks for your work, we are evaluating the integrate of the framework with our vgpu implementation, will make/propose changes to this. > > Thanks, > Neo > -- Thanks, Jike