Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 6 Nov 2008 08:41:53 -0800 (PST) | From | H L <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/16 v6] PCI: Linux kernel SR-IOV support |
| |
I have not modified any existing drivers, but instead I threw together a bare-bones module enabling me to make a call to pci_iov_register() and then poke at an SR-IOV adapter's /sys entries for which no driver was loaded.
It appears from my perusal thus far that drivers using these new SR-IOV patches will require modification; i.e. the driver associated with the Physical Function (PF) will be required to make the pci_iov_register() call along with the requisite notify() function. Essentially this suggests to me a model for the PF driver to perform any "global actions" or setup on behalf of VFs before enabling them after which VF drivers could be associated.
I have so far only seen Yu Zhao's "7-patch" set. I've not yet looked at his subsequently tendered "15-patch" set so I don't know what has changed. The hardware/firmware implementation for any given SR-IOV compatible device, will determine the extent of differences required between a PF driver and a VF driver.
-- Lance Hartmann
--- On Thu, 11/6/08, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> Date: Thursday, November 6, 2008, 9:43 AM > On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 07:40:12AM -0800, H L wrote: > > > > Greetings (from a new lurker to the list), > > Welcome! > > > To your question Greg, "yes" and "sort > of" ;-). I have started taking > > a look at these patches with a strong interest in > understanding how > > they work. I've built a kernel with them and > tried out a few things > > with real SR-IOV hardware. > > Did you have to modify individual drivers to take advantage > of this > code? It looks like the core code will run on this type of > hardware, > but there seems to be no real advantage until a driver is > modified to > use it, right? > > Or am I missing some great advantage to having this code > without > modified drivers? > > thanks, > > greg k-h
|  |