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;
Date:   Mon, 26 Jul 2021 17:28:31 -0600
From:   Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc:     Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] vfio/mdev: don't warn if ->request is not set
Message-ID: <20210726172831.3a7978fd.alex.williamson@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210726230906.GD1721383@nvidia.com>
References: <20210726143524.155779-1-hch@lst.de>
        <20210726143524.155779-3-hch@lst.de>
        <87zgu93sxz.fsf@redhat.com>
        <20210726230906.GD1721383@nvidia.com>
Organization: Red Hat
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 20:09:06 -0300
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 07:07:04PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> 
> > But I wonder why nobody else implements this? Lack of surprise removal?  
> 
> The only implementation triggers an eventfd that seems to be the same
> eventfd as the interrupt..
> 
> Do you know how this works in userspace? I'm surprised that the
> interrupt eventfd can trigger an observation that the kernel driver
> wants to be unplugged?

I think we're talking about ccw, but I see QEMU registering separate
eventfds for each of the 3 IRQ indexes and the mdev driver specifically
triggering the req_trigger...?  Thanks,

Alex