Linux PCI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Eli Cohen <eli@mellanox.com>
Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Bodong Wang <bodong@mellanox.com>,
	"bhelgaas@google.com" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci/sriov: Add an option to probe VFs or not before enabling SR-IOV
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 10:48:05 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170321234805.GB3972@gwshan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <VI1PR0501MB2798FFB6E0337AB860B5D2A8C53D0@VI1PR0501MB2798.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:34:46PM +0000, Eli Cohen wrote:
>> If we want to talk about the ABI, I would suggest drawing from existing ABIs.  We already have
>> drivers_autoprobe as part of the standard sysfs ABI, so if we want a binary switch, then 
>>sriov_drivers_autoprobe might be a logical choice.  If you're concerned about this mythical overhead of > binding to one driver then another, then why not draw from the driver_override interface to allow the 
>> user to specify the driver to bind to, perhaps sriov_driver_override.  Then if the user wants to bind all 
>> the devices to vfio-pci, they can do so easily.  I still fail to see that probing some fixed number of the VFs 
>> and leaving the rest unprobed has any practical value and I imagine bugs coming in because users are 
>> confused why some of their VFs behave differently than others.  Thanks,
>
>I agree with Alex - the interface should better be binary - either probe VFs or not. The rest can be done with binding/unbinding VFs as necessary. The main goal is to refrain from automatically initializing virtual functions at the hypervisor if they were initially instantiated to assign then to guests.
>

It's fairly reasonable. Thanks for confirm. I'll review v2.

Thanks,
Gavin

  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-21 23:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-20 15:14 [PATCH] pci/sriov: Add an option to probe VFs or not before enabling SR-IOV bodong
2017-03-20 23:07 ` Gavin Shan
2017-03-20 23:34   ` Bodong Wang
2017-03-21  0:24     ` Gavin Shan
2017-03-21  3:38       ` Bodong Wang
2017-03-21  4:57     ` Alex Williamson
2017-03-21  5:43       ` Gavin Shan
2017-03-21  6:01         ` Alex Williamson
2017-03-21  9:25           ` Gavin Shan
2017-03-21 14:23             ` Alex Williamson
2017-03-21 14:34               ` Eli Cohen
2017-03-21 23:48                 ` Gavin Shan [this message]
2017-03-21 23:46               ` Gavin Shan
2017-03-21 13:43           ` Bodong Wang

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170321234805.GB3972@gwshan \
    --to=gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=bodong@mellanox.com \
    --cc=eli@mellanox.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=saeedm@mellanox.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox