From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] eal: enable vfio independent of no PCI
	flag
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 18:27:22 +0200
Message-ID: <2615630.Np2p4rFThG@xps>
References: <1499946530-29581-1-git-send-email-hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
 <3342808.snfueRI35B@xps> <6e9b5a3b-4a5c-13b4-f0d2-776313b08f93@nxp.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>, dev@dpdk.org
To: anatoly.burakov@intel.com
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B7EE1B2D2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 18:27:25 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <6e9b5a3b-4a5c-13b4-f0d2-776313b08f93@nxp.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

10/10/2017 15:46, Hemant Agrawal:
> Hi Thomas, Anatoly,
> 
> On 10/7/2017 5:07 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 07/10/2017 13:20, Hemant Agrawal:
> >> In case no_pci is configured, other buses e.g. fslmc bus will
> >> still need the the vfio to be enabled.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
> >> ---
> >> v2: enabled VFIO, independent of no-pci flag as suggested by Thomas
> > [...]
> >> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c
> >> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c
> >> @@ -733,10 +733,8 @@ static int rte_eal_vfio_setup(void)
> >>  {
> >>  	int vfio_enabled = 0;
> >>
> >> -	if (!internal_config.no_pci) {
> >> -		pci_vfio_enable();
> >> -		vfio_enabled |= pci_vfio_is_enabled();
> >> -	}
> >> +	pci_vfio_enable();
> >> +	vfio_enabled |= pci_vfio_is_enabled();
> >
> > You are enabling vfio_pci.
> > This part could stay conditionned by no_pci.
> >
> > I was thinking you need vfio without vfio_pci. Am I right?
> 
> yes
> > If yes, I suggest to enable only vfio root module.
> >
> 
> vfio_enable should be done only once. So, if I enable it for "vfio", 
> pci_vfio_enable is not required.
> In any case it is not storing any PCI specific data and there are no 
> error checks here of "vfio_pci" enable failure.
> 
> So, if we use,
> 	vfio_enable("vfio");
> 	vfio_enabled |= vfio_is_enabled("vfio");
> 
> It seems no_pci check will not have any value.
> 
> let me know your thoughts?

I don't know the code managing VFIO.
Anatoly, please can you help meeting the requirement of
VFIO always enabled?