Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8c0a:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id go10csp2223452pxb; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 07:21:28 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw5rjM8W3vgT68B0dIRGoQnflqRBSAKeNSXpGdBmouiRporpQRvGWHT474EGzaHfxys+i9v X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c7c8:: with SMTP id o8mr8847814eds.137.1613056887830; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 07:21:27 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f2si3698754ejh.244.2021.02.11.07.21.02; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 07:21:27 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@nvidia.com header.s=n1 header.b=g11EzGwu; arc=fail (signature failed); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=nvidia.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230035AbhBKPTH (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:19:07 -0500 Received: from hqnvemgate24.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.143]:13151 "EHLO hqnvemgate24.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230074AbhBKOuW (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Feb 2021 09:50:22 -0500 Received: from hqmail.nvidia.com (Not Verified[216.228.121.13]) by hqnvemgate24.nvidia.com (using TLS: TLSv1.2, AES256-SHA) id ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 06:49:29 -0800 Received: from HQMAIL111.nvidia.com (172.20.187.18) by HQMAIL111.nvidia.com (172.20.187.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 14:49:29 +0000 Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.57.177) by HQMAIL111.nvidia.com (172.20.187.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 14:49:29 +0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=HzqM86tay4hV/V/HPORinh9SVEGz1ZkNMaPdNHoIZgQgtsm+yL2jUMo7IYFt3JxRNeQJ2mHmEGaWVTb5WnkcYJjV+0ls02ZjKm9GNlEiY0zlN6HbH3C34zhks773tRYWHnJFeGu8a67+Q1oWqAjfRzvVXnEI5D/gGrdkFuBViz/KcPD2C6iT2kAPSoHYSMWwLJp5RTu7zABc8cvMZDxBKvC1rvgQgV9Uv/bx9q4+SCLDzJ+AuYTmZAR+QA4SkI9JidbniLhL6NArN72XGMByObW6MBmoC7zMkNG9W2tWTshK/RKKsmwpT3gxYVqQcI+BVCNy34T6UMj3ijrNqjuBzA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=ErIPf6mjysjaYOMJQ1I+4T189UbJl5Ac4YEWLaoX1aE=; b=R/t+zfufRh9qszA2A9fCP6hc11MddC5Mxrc4cDCcsZmboKiWJT/t9P+YsUXWB55PPZm3wtoCPZEr9Q0/qJ35M0AGpEbfpIstHJJwLkC0GqLl7kKst1YoY9qczKZIeVrZMV68UpxIlZd/wk6UkFSH7LdPzEQ70Hc1EvZB8A8Q3vur6t12bvcGBt160Fag11MXdeLdCZLslsKRovML2JnC4643dX1qOSx3GbBHECWX9/yA8h/GxpsaEA84wqmJJ7CZ91UhfT5G0SjyyD3FO+zVm91OWUzuRLc+W5nlKBHTxjqknI/fswN0ol8Fs6G6vv0UagUU/pIMCY7vEUfSrgMZew== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nvidia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nvidia.com; arc=none Received: from BY5PR12MB3827.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:1ab::16) by BY5PR12MB4855.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:1dd::10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3846.26; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 14:49:24 +0000 Received: from BY5PR12MB3827.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::10d:e939:2f8f:71ca]) by BY5PR12MB3827.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::10d:e939:2f8f:71ca%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3846.027; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 14:49:24 +0000 Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:49:22 -0400 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: Christoph Hellwig CC: Max Gurtovoy , Alexey Kardashevskiy , Cornelia Huck , Alex Williamson , Matthew Rosato , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] vfio/pci: use x86 naming instead of igd Message-ID: <20210211144922.GM4247@nvidia.com> References: <20210201162828.5938-1-mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> <20210201162828.5938-9-mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> <20210201181454.22112b57.cohuck@redhat.com> <599c6452-8ba6-a00a-65e7-0167f21eac35@linux.ibm.com> <20210201114230.37c18abd@omen.home.shazbot.org> <20210202170659.1c62a9e8.cohuck@redhat.com> <806c138e-685c-0955-7c15-93cb1d4fe0d9@ozlabs.ru> <6c96f41a-0daa-12d4-528e-6db44df1a5a6@nvidia.com> <20210211085021.GD2378134@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210211085021.GD2378134@infradead.org> X-ClientProxiedBy: BL0PR02CA0077.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:51::18) To BY5PR12MB3827.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:1ab::16) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from mlx.ziepe.ca (142.162.115.133) by BL0PR02CA0077.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:51::18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3846.25 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 14:49:23 +0000 Received: from jgg by mlx with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lADHW-006YHq-B7; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:49:22 -0400 X-Header: ProcessedBy-CMR-outbound DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nvidia.com; s=n1; t=1613054969; bh=ErIPf6mjysjaYOMJQ1I+4T189UbJl5Ac4YEWLaoX1aE=; h=ARC-Seal:ARC-Message-Signature:ARC-Authentication-Results:Date: From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:X-ClientProxiedBy:MIME-Version: X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType:X-Header; b=g11EzGwuHh4fAN+RX1sq/2DW5gOEMsmdB7Y6jfcYmVFJYnbTQIQhE6dYMkJicMT4o iJ9fYqxwipOIguAvwpbWmRkVd8gmwKGvXrmzsXbjRU2W6zxF5Z8k+xiM7ea2PJJur2 Mrr/lV2ptNmNpd7IN0hTRaGakV4E1pJ2D8ALrZZga3Y3JLPPJyzcy4yE37dHp0ReBs WYUloxQ2m7Q6ZpYPGbQHKgwJul3YKBQacvCkZyrn9Fwxx41Mt/kut3in1WYZE7A5Kb jP/1IubY1hy8F8NDOhIppc0E193JxUJbvlEEr9yF409o3hokUvNQuDCIUAaP8zmhlE taKiPJpyvKTRg== Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 08:50:21AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 11:12:49AM +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote: > > But the PCI function (the bounded BDF) is GPU function or NVLINK function ? > > > > If it's NVLINK function then we should fail probing in the host vfio-pci > > driver. > > > > if its a GPU function so it shouldn't been called nvlink2 vfio-pci driver. > > Its just an extension in the GPU vfio-pci driver. > > I suspect the trivial and correct answer is that we should just drop > the driver entirely. It is for obsolete hardware that never had > upstream The HW is still in active deployment and use. The big system, Summit, only went to production sometime in 2019, so it is barely started on its lifecycle. Something around a 5-10 year operational lifetime would be pretty typical in this area. > support for even using it in the guest. It also is the reason for > keeping cruft in the always built-in powernv platform code alive that > is otherwise dead wood. Or stated another way, once vfio-pci supports loadable extensions the non-upstream hardware could provide the extension it needs out of tree. Jason