Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] vsock/virtio: set vsock frontend ready in virtio_vsock_probe() | From | Xianting Tian <> | Date | Wed, 21 Jul 2021 09:30:28 +0800 |
| |
Got it.
thanks for the comments,
在 2021/7/20 下午9:12, Stefan Hajnoczi 写道: > On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 07:05:39PM +0800, Xianting Tian wrote: >> 在 2021/7/20 下午6:23, Stefan Hajnoczi 写道: >>> On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 03:13:37PM +0800, Xianting Tian wrote: >>>> Add the missed virtio_device_ready() to set vsock frontend ready. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Xianting Tian<xianting.tian@linux.alibaba.com> >>>> --- >>>> net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 2 ++ >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>> Please include a changelog when you send v2, v3, etc patches. >> OK, thanks. >>>> diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c >>>> index e0c2c992a..dc834b8fd 100644 >>>> --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c >>>> +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c >>>> @@ -639,6 +639,8 @@ static int virtio_vsock_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev) >>>> mutex_unlock(&the_virtio_vsock_mutex); >>>> + virtio_device_ready(vdev); >>> Why is this patch necessary? >> Sorry, I didn't notice the check in virtio_dev_probe(), >> >> As Jason comment, I alsoe think we need to be consistent: switch to use >> virtio_device_ready() for all the drivers. What's opinion about this? > According to the documentation the virtio_device_read() API is optional: > > /** > * virtio_device_ready - enable vq use in probe function > * @vdev: the device > * > * Driver must call this to use vqs in the probe function. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > * > * Note: vqs are enabled automatically after probe returns. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > */ > > Many drivers do not use vqs during the ->probe() function. They don't > need to call virtio_device_ready(). That's why the virtio_vsock driver > doesn't call it. > > But if a ->probe() function needs to send virtqueue buffers, e.g. to > query the device or activate some device feature, then the driver will > need to call it explicitly. > > The documentation is clear and this design is less error-prone than > relying on all drivers to call it manually. I suggest leaving things > unchanged. > > Stefan
| |