Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753215AbYKFRsR (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Nov 2008 12:48:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751525AbYKFRr7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Nov 2008 12:47:59 -0500 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:36687 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751435AbYKFRr6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Nov 2008 12:47:58 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 10:47:41 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Greg KH Cc: H L , Yu Zhao , randy.dunlap@oracle.com, grundler@parisc-linux.org, achiang@hp.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, rdreier@cisco.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, Chris Wright Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/16 v6] PCI: Linux kernel SR-IOV support Message-ID: <20081106174741.GC11773@parisc-linux.org> References: <20081106154351.GA30459@kroah.com> <894107.30288.qm@web45108.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <20081106164919.GA4099@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081106164919.GA4099@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1902 Lines: 40 On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 08:49:19AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > 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 > rewritten? The current model being implemented by my colleagues has separate drivers for the PF (aka native) and VF devices. I don't personally believe this is the correct path, but I'm reserving judgement until I see some code. I don't think we really know what the One True Usage model is for VF devices. Chris Wright has some ideas, I have some ideas and Yu Zhao has some ideas. I bet there's other people who have other ideas too. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/