[lkml]   [2008]   [Nov]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [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

> 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?


greg k-h

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-11-06 18:01    [W:0.111 / U:10.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site