Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 6 Nov 2008 08:49:19 -0800 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/16 v6] PCI: Linux kernel SR-IOV support |
| |
A: No. Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 08:41:53AM -0800, H L wrote: > 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.
Where would the VF drivers have to be associated? On the "pci_dev" level or on a higher one?
Will all drivers that want to bind to a "VF" device need to be rewritten?
> 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.
Yeah, that's what I'm worried/curious about. Without seeing the code for such a driver, how can we properly evaluate if this infrastructure is the correct one and the proper way to do all of this?
thanks,
greg k-h
|  |