Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH V8 0/6] mdev based hardware virtio offloading support | From | Jason Wang <> | Date | Wed, 6 Nov 2019 11:56:46 +0800 |
| |
On 2019/11/6 上午1:58, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 17:32:34 +0800 > Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Hi all: >> >> There are hardwares that can do virtio datapath offloading while >> having its own control path. This path tries to implement a mdev based >> unified API to support using kernel virtio driver to drive those >> devices. This is done by introducing a new mdev transport for virtio >> (virtio_mdev) and register itself as a new kind of mdev driver. Then >> it provides a unified way for kernel virtio driver to talk with mdev >> device implementation. >> >> Though the series only contains kernel driver support, the goal is to >> make the transport generic enough to support userspace drivers. This >> means vhost-mdev[1] could be built on top as well by resuing the >> transport. >> >> A sample driver is also implemented which simulate a virito-net >> loopback ethernet device on top of vringh + workqueue. This could be >> used as a reference implementation for real hardware driver. >> >> Also a real ICF VF driver was also posted here[2] which is a good >> reference for vendors who is interested in their own virtio datapath >> offloading product. >> >> Consider mdev framework only support VFIO device and driver right now, >> this series also extend it to support other types. This is done >> through introducing class id to the device and pairing it with >> id_talbe claimed by the driver. On top, this seris also decouple >> device specific parents ops out of the common ones. >> >> Pktgen test was done with virito-net + mvnet loop back device. >> >> Please review. >> >> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/10/31/440 >> [2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/10/15/1226 >> >> Changes from V7: >> - drop {set|get}_mdev_features for virtio >> - typo and comment style fixes > > Seems we're nearly there, all the remaining comments are relatively > superficial, though I would appreciate a v9 addressing them as well as > the checkpatch warnings: > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/68977/
Will do.
Btw, do you plan to merge vhost-mdev patch on top? Or you prefer it to go through Michael's vhost tree?
Thanks
> > Consider this a last call for reviews or acks (or naks) from affected > mdev vendor drivers, mdev-core sub-maintainers (Hi Kirti), virtio > stakeholders, etc. Thanks, > > Alex >
| |