From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA3B7C433E6 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:48:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3A5C20714 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:48:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="a4BmW7ig" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726828AbgH1NsH (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:48:07 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.61]:46490 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726321AbgH1NsF (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:48:05 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1598622484; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PyImQr8Vv71Nkg4eGLf/31gz0soaKXkRyk+wNyHdUvU=; b=a4BmW7igN0nosE1ZDkltWUilMgkuRliEVXXEi9fQcd78Vd/kOiK4g0bGGWR85ac1kYnMUq 92IcLl8l1kuSOdoWU+8W7JrU03gQ2EyWwG1WbR18xSBQAjXO0jHeq2ZJbdXWazeLR3LUWX z6gkZjysSmlIiHm3AC/w7vK9Tf9TBA0= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-574-Ets9HjX7NxWOzyPhwKwiwA-1; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 09:48:02 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Ets9HjX7NxWOzyPhwKwiwA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37BBE8730A8; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:47:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin (ovpn-113-255.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.255]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5F055C1D0; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:47:44 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 15:47:41 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck To: Yan Zhao Cc: Alex Williamson , "Daniel =?UTF-8?B?UC5C?= =?UTF-8?B?ZXJyYW5nw6k=?=" , kvm@vger.kernel.org, libvir-list@redhat.com, Jason Wang , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kwankhede@nvidia.com, eauger@redhat.com, xin-ran.wang@intel.com, corbet@lwn.net, openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org, shaohe.feng@intel.com, kevin.tian@intel.com, Parav Pandit , jian-feng.ding@intel.com, dgilbert@redhat.com, zhenyuw@linux.intel.com, hejie.xu@intel.com, bao.yumeng@zte.com.cn, smooney@redhat.com, intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org, eskultet@redhat.com, Jiri Pirko , dinechin@redhat.com, devel@ovirt.org Subject: Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices Message-ID: <20200828154741.30cfc1a3.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20200826064117.GA22243@joy-OptiPlex-7040> References: <20200814051601.GD15344@joy-OptiPlex-7040> <20200818085527.GB20215@redhat.com> <3a073222-dcfe-c02d-198b-29f6a507b2e1@redhat.com> <20200818091628.GC20215@redhat.com> <20200818113652.5d81a392.cohuck@redhat.com> <20200820003922.GE21172@joy-OptiPlex-7040> <20200819212234.223667b3@x1.home> <20200820031621.GA24997@joy-OptiPlex-7040> <20200825163925.1c19b0f0.cohuck@redhat.com> <20200826064117.GA22243@joy-OptiPlex-7040> Organization: Red Hat GmbH MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 14:41:17 +0800 Yan Zhao wrote: > previously, we want to regard the two mdevs created with dsa-1dwq x 30 and > dsa-2dwq x 15 as compatible, because the two mdevs consist equal resources. > > But, as it's a burden to upper layer, we agree that if this condition > happens, we still treat the two as incompatible. > > To fix it, either the driver should expose dsa-1dwq only, or the target > dsa-2dwq needs to be destroyed and reallocated via dsa-1dwq x 30. AFAIU, these are mdev types, aren't they? So, basically, any management software needs to take care to use the matching mdev type on the target system for device creation?