From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6B34D26A; Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:00:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.156.1 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718805629; cv=none; b=LT0BP/3giZNOwWvlxHmM1Dlti6eG4qomDkBT4+0znLOuuOHac51Z7F7mXiHN9HY4xEB1Tmy41RSOBkEY+ltVtR1KuPtc54OT9y4uyphuZtK7safOvcJxtSblrx96neWMvWTtJ7ejEIPyJlVFeFa2HWK12yMpPVs1wo+aSFc0UW0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718805629; c=relaxed/simple; bh=k3gSboAJc+MvETXcfhdx81BB8B2hrN6M6hXGZXPOdq0=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=EsIuSD4OEoPC8FiRo+11o2Sx2fZwKAB5iyQseSakbCIAk+s+j00tSfFP92vCQ8UUaoEqFOH8LBLRutD6TU19syKAcIruQAMT7gEuSNcuhfiQOE+OPxB3T4dObK2OuxK+0U5HYI0MzNby3MbQn1TNnThMG3NkkJfUiZ3CpnYClIM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=S9Nd1see; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.156.1 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="S9Nd1see" Received: from pps.filterd (m0360083.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 45JDR102003196; Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:00:24 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h= message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; s=pp1; bh= k3gSboAJc+MvETXcfhdx81BB8B2hrN6M6hXGZXPOdq0=; b=S9Nd1seeM2taZwhn 3Go0MPxv9KF29c3xx+SsDcbtZlLa8/ddvAX1ckUKXEnp7prf8VbtZK3wmMOWAEuK XE4TRDXdtNu/f2aebtfk8NcL1hUsc5wEfrM9KKDk2yoHC0aJdubXBjU4sDZP0sF9 zCeHWOwwwzdpQ8VgmdoXmp9JRCS0HvjD6TT94VB1Kclw2Subfjw2MghuuWCxysvr T207gexiGQNz1aoV1iAaOs6EFqNR3OOlLsdtz1wYhfU0VjmZ6pXrUi/YCFgT/W20 J/HUD3yWjhw7Nz7C8WY3q6We7IScQAsw+ozQtmDoA0JWozJanbfSQymMB3udcqe0 KM0KWg== Received: from ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (5b.69.3da9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.61.105.91]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3yux3fgfma-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:00:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 45JCAgh6023990; Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:00:22 GMT Received: from smtprelay03.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.70]) by ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3ysp9qd1w7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:00:22 +0000 Received: from smtpav05.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav05.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [10.241.53.104]) by smtprelay03.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 45JE0IlJ11666108 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:00:20 GMT Received: from smtpav05.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53B0058069; Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:00:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav05.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569F95808E; Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:00:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-479af74c-31f9-11b2-a85c-e4ddee11713b.ibm.com (unknown [9.61.159.49]) by smtpav05.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:00:15 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <8ae9b1bef0e8ef4689873911c8ae5c9a921401a9.camel@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/cio: add missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() macros From: Eric Farman To: Halil Pasic Cc: Vineeth Vijayan , Jeff Johnson , Peter Oberparleiter , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Alexander Gordeev , Christian Borntraeger , Sven Schnelle , Matthew Rosato , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 10:00:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20240619123255.4b1a6c6d.pasic@linux.ibm.com> References: <20240615-md-s390-drivers-s390-cio-v1-1-8fc9584e8595@quicinc.com> <064eb313-2f38-479d-80bd-14777f7d3d62@linux.ibm.com> <20240619123255.4b1a6c6d.pasic@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.52.2 (3.52.2-1.fc40) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 3U6wkBpOZZvOXgSq-0KAzS0OtU9mEOAY X-Proofpoint-GUID: 3U6wkBpOZZvOXgSq-0KAzS0OtU9mEOAY X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.28.16 definitions=2024-06-19_02,2024-06-19_01,2024-05-17_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=943 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2405170001 definitions=main-2406190104 On Wed, 2024-06-19 at 12:32 +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: > On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 16:11:33 -0400 > Eric Farman wrote: >=20 > > > > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("VFIO based Physical Subchannel device > > > > driver");=C2=A0=20 > > >=20 > > > Halil/Mathew/Eric, > > > Could you please comment on this ?=C2=A0=20 > >=20 > > That's what is in the prologue, and is fine. >=20 > Eric can you explain it to me why is the attribute "physical" > appropriate > here? I did a quick grep for "Physical Subchannel" only turned up > hits > in vfio-ccw. One hit, in the prologue comment of this module. "Physical device" adds three to the tally, but only one of those is in vfio-ccw so we should expand your query regarding "physical" vs "emulated" vs "virtual" in the context of, say, tape devices. >=20 > My best guess is that "physical" was somehow intended to mean the > opposite of "virtual". But actually it does not matter if our > underlying > subchannel is emulated or not, at least AFAIU. I also believe this was intended to mean "not virtual," regardless of whether there's emulation taking place underneath. That point is moot since I don't see that information being surfaced, such that the driver can only work with "physical" subchannels. I'm fine with removing it if it bothers you, but I don't see it as an issue. Thanks, Eric >=20 > Regards, > Halil