Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220425062735.172576-2-lulu@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220425062735.172576-2-lulu@redhat.com>
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Apr 2022 14:05:21 +0800
Message-ID: <CACGkMEtGZqoei6i=LmVrTgNfWM4SpxjQH-8j7BP=EoFO=iqeYw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] vdpa/vp_vdpa : add vdpa tool support in vp_vdpa
To:     Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com>
Cc:     mst <mst@redhat.com>,
        virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:27 PM Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> this patch is to add the support for vdpa tool in vp_vdpa
> here is the example steps
>
> modprobe vp_vdpa
> modprobe vhost_vdpa
> echo 0000:00:06.0>/sys/bus/pci/drivers/virtio-pci/unbind
> echo 1af4 1041 > /sys/bus/pci/drivers/vp-vdpa/new_id
>
> vdpa dev add name vdpa1 mgmtdev pci/0000:00:06.0
>
> Signed-off-by: Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com>
> ---
>  drivers/vdpa/virtio_pci/vp_vdpa.c | 138 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 106 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/virtio_pci/vp_vdpa.c b/drivers/vdpa/virtio_pci/vp_vdpa.c
> index cce101e6a940..873402977543 100644
> --- a/drivers/vdpa/virtio_pci/vp_vdpa.c
> +++ b/drivers/vdpa/virtio_pci/vp_vdpa.c
> @@ -32,7 +32,8 @@ struct vp_vring {
>
>  struct vp_vdpa {
>         struct vdpa_device vdpa;
> -       struct virtio_pci_modern_device mdev;
> +       /* this is an pointer point to the mdev in vp_vdpa_mgmtdev*/
> +       struct virtio_pci_modern_device *mdev;

The code can explain itself, so the comment is redundant.

>         struct vp_vring *vring;
>         struct vdpa_callback config_cb;
>         char msix_name[VP_VDPA_NAME_SIZE];
> @@ -41,6 +42,12 @@ struct vp_vdpa {
>         int vectors;
>  };
>
> +struct vp_vdpa_mgmtdev {
> +       struct vdpa_mgmt_dev mgtdev;
> +       struct virtio_pci_modern_device mdev;

I think coupling it with mgmt device is probably not good, any reason
we can't allocate it independently?

Thanks

> +       struct vp_vdpa *vp_vdpa;
> +};