Re: [PATCH 2/3] vDPA/ifcvf: enable Intel C5000X-PL virtio-block for vDPA

[Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>]

在 2021/4/14 下午5:18, Zhu Lingshan 写道:
> This commit enabled Intel FPGA SmartNIC C5000X-PL virtio-block
> for vDPA.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhu Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.h | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>   drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c | 10 +++++++++-
>   2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.h b/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.h
> index 1c04cd256fa7..8b403522bf06 100644
> --- a/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.h
> +++ b/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.h
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
>   #include <linux/pci_regs.h>
>   #include <linux/vdpa.h>
>   #include <uapi/linux/virtio_net.h>
> +#include <uapi/linux/virtio_blk.h>
>   #include <uapi/linux/virtio_config.h>
>   #include <uapi/linux/virtio_pci.h>
>   
> @@ -28,7 +29,12 @@
>   #define C5000X_PL_SUBSYS_VENDOR_ID	0x8086
>   #define C5000X_PL_SUBSYS_DEVICE_ID	0x0001
>   
> -#define IFCVF_SUPPORTED_FEATURES \
> +#define C5000X_PL_BLK_VENDOR_ID		0x1AF4
> +#define C5000X_PL_BLK_DEVICE_ID		0x1001
> +#define C5000X_PL_BLK_SUBSYS_VENDOR_ID	0x8086
> +#define C5000X_PL_BLK_SUBSYS_DEVICE_ID	0x0002
> +
> +#define IFCVF_NET_SUPPORTED_FEATURES \
>   		((1ULL << VIRTIO_NET_F_MAC)			| \
>   		 (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_ANY_LAYOUT)			| \
>   		 (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)			| \
> @@ -37,6 +43,15 @@
>   		 (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM)		| \
>   		 (1ULL << VIRTIO_NET_F_MRG_RXBUF))
>   
> +#define IFCVF_BLK_SUPPORTED_FEATURES \
> +		((1ULL << VIRTIO_BLK_F_SIZE_MAX)		| \
> +		 (1ULL << VIRTIO_BLK_F_SEG_MAX)			| \
> +		 (1ULL << VIRTIO_BLK_F_BLK_SIZE)		| \
> +		 (1ULL << VIRTIO_BLK_F_TOPOLOGY)		| \
> +		 (1ULL << VIRTIO_BLK_F_MQ)			| \
> +		 (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)			| \
> +		 (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM))


I think we've discussed this sometime in the past but what's the reason 
for such whitelist consider there's already a get_features() implemention?

E.g Any reason to block VIRTIO_BLK_F_WRITE_ZEROS or VIRTIO_F_RING_PACKED?

Thanks


> +
>   /* Only one queue pair for now. */
>   #define IFCVF_MAX_QUEUE_PAIRS	1
>   
> diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c b/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c
> index 99b0a6b4c227..9b6a38b798fa 100644
> --- a/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c
> @@ -171,7 +171,11 @@ static u64 ifcvf_vdpa_get_features(struct vdpa_device *vdpa_dev)
>   	struct ifcvf_hw *vf = vdpa_to_vf(vdpa_dev);
>   	u64 features;
>   
> -	features = ifcvf_get_features(vf) & IFCVF_SUPPORTED_FEATURES;
> +	if (vf->dev_type == VIRTIO_ID_NET)
> +		features = ifcvf_get_features(vf) & IFCVF_NET_SUPPORTED_FEATURES;
> +
> +	if (vf->dev_type == VIRTIO_ID_BLOCK)
> +		features = ifcvf_get_features(vf) & IFCVF_BLK_SUPPORTED_FEATURES;
>   
>   	return features;
>   }
> @@ -509,6 +513,10 @@ static struct pci_device_id ifcvf_pci_ids[] = {
>   			 C5000X_PL_DEVICE_ID,
>   			 C5000X_PL_SUBSYS_VENDOR_ID,
>   			 C5000X_PL_SUBSYS_DEVICE_ID) },
> +	{ PCI_DEVICE_SUB(C5000X_PL_BLK_VENDOR_ID,
> +			 C5000X_PL_BLK_DEVICE_ID,
> +			 C5000X_PL_BLK_SUBSYS_VENDOR_ID,
> +			 C5000X_PL_BLK_SUBSYS_DEVICE_ID) },
>   
>   	{ 0 },
>   };