Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Make the rest of the VFIO driver interface use vfio_device

[Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 14:31:49 -0300
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 01:28:31PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > Prior series have transformed other parts of VFIO from working on struct
> > device or struct vfio_group into working directly on struct
> > vfio_device. Based on that work we now have vfio_device's readily
> > available in all the drivers.
> > 
> > Update the rest of the driver facing API to use vfio_device as an input.
> > 
> > The following are switched from struct device to struct vfio_device:
> >   vfio_register_notifier()
> >   vfio_unregister_notifier()
> >   vfio_pin_pages()
> >   vfio_unpin_pages()
> >   vfio_dma_rw()
> > 
> > The following group APIs are obsoleted and removed by just using struct
> > vfio_device with the above:
> >   vfio_group_pin_pages()
> >   vfio_group_unpin_pages()
> >   vfio_group_iommu_domain()
> >   vfio_group_get_external_user_from_dev()
> > 
> > To retain the performance of the new device APIs relative to their group
> > versions optimize how vfio_group_add_container_user() is used to avoid
> > calling it when the driver must already guarantee the device is open and
> > the container_users incrd.
> > 
> > The remaining exported VFIO group interfaces are only used by kvm, and are
> > addressed by a parallel series.
> > 
> > This series is based on Christoph's gvt rework here:
> > 
> >  https://lore.kernel.org/all/5a8b9f48-2c32-8177-1c18-e3bd7bfde558@intel.com/
> > 
> > and so will need the PR merged first.  
> 
> Hi Alex,
> 
> Since all the shared branch PRs are ready, do you have any remarks on
> this series and the others before I rebase and repost them?

Only the nit in the commit log:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220429142820.6afe7bbe.alex.williamson@redhat.com/ 

> This one has a few changes to the commit messages outstanding, but v2
> didn't have any code changes.
> 
> Also, what order would like the different series in - they conflict
> with each other a little bit. I suggest this:
> 
> - mdev group removal (this one)
> - Remove vfio_device_get_from_dev()
>   https://lore.kernel.org/r/0-v1-7f2292e6b2ba+44839-vfio_get_from_dev_jgg@nvidia.com
> - Remove group from kvm
>   https://lore.kernel.org/r/0-v1-33906a626da1+16b0-vfio_kvm_no_group_jgg@nvidia.com

I think you mean (v2):

https://lore.kernel.org/all/0-v2-6a528653a750+1578a-vfio_kvm_no_group_jgg@nvidia.com/

Otherwise, thanks for sorting these out for me.

> All of them seem to have got enough reviews now.
>
> I have one more series on this group topic and a few little patches still
> 
> It would be great if you could merge the gvt and iommu series together
> into your tree toward linux-next so I can post patches against a
> stable commit ID so the build-bots can test them.

Please check my vfio next branch and see if this matches what you're
looking for:

https://github.com/awilliam/linux-vfio/commits/next

I'll look for any fallout from Stephen and build bots on Monday's
linux-next compilation.  Thanks,

Alex