kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com>,
	cohuck@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aviadye@nvidia.com,
	oren@nvidia.com, shahafs@nvidia.com, parav@nvidia.com,
	artemp@nvidia.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com, ACurrid@nvidia.com,
	cjia@nvidia.com, yishaih@nvidia.com, kevin.tian@intel.com,
	hch@infradead.org, targupta@nvidia.com,
	shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com, liulongfang@huawei.com,
	yan.y.zhao@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] PCI: add matching checks for driver_override binding
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 18:22:45 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210615182245.54944509.alex.williamson@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210615233257.GB1002214@nvidia.com>

On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 20:32:57 -0300
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 05:22:42PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> 
> > > > b) alone is a functional, runtime difference.    
> > > 
> > > I would state b) differently:
> > > 
> > > b) Ignore the driver-override-only match entries in the ID table.  
> > 
> > No, pci_match_device() returns NULL if a match is found that is marked
> > driver-override-only and a driver_override is not specified.  That's
> > the same as no match at all.  We don't then go on to search past that
> > match in the table, we fail to bind the driver.  That's effectively an
> > anti-match when there's no driver_override on the device.  
> 
> anti-match isn't the intention. The deployment will have match tables
> where all entires are either flags=0 or are driver-override-only.

I'd expect pci-pf-stub to have one of each, an any-id with
override-only flag and the one device ID currently in the table with
no flag.

> I would say that mixed match tables make driver-override-only into an
> anti-match is actually a minor bug in the patch.
> 
> The series isn't about adding some new anti-match scheme.
> 
> > I understand that's not your intended use case, but I think this allows
> > that and justifies handling a dynamic ID the same as a static ID.
> > Adding a field to pci_device_id, which is otherwise able to be fully
> > specified via new_id, except for this field, feels like a bug.  Thanks,  
> 
> Okay, I see what you are saying clearly now.
> 
> Your example usage seems legit to me, but I really don't want to
> entangle it with this series. It is a seperate idea, it can go as a
> seperate work that uses the new flags and an updated new_id and
> related parts by someone who wants it.
> 
> I hope you'll understand that having NVIDIA Mellanox persue what you
> describe above is just not going to work..

I understand that use case might hit a nerve, but I don't particularly
see why handling static and dynamic IDs consistently wrt to this new
flags field is controversial.  Thanks,

Alex


  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-16  0:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-03 16:07 [RFC PATCH v4 00/11] Introduce vfio-pci-core subsystem Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:07 ` [PATCH 01/11] vfio-pci: rename vfio_pci.c to vfio_pci_core.c Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:08 ` [PATCH 02/11] vfio-pci: rename vfio_pci_private.h to vfio_pci_core.h Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:08 ` [PATCH 03/11] vfio-pci: rename vfio_pci_device to vfio_pci_core_device Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:08 ` [PATCH 04/11] vfio-pci: rename ops functions to fit core namings Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:08 ` [PATCH 05/11] vfio-pci: include vfio header in vfio_pci_core.h Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:08 ` [PATCH 06/11] vfio-pci: introduce vfio_pci.c Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:08 ` [PATCH 07/11] vfio-pci: move igd initialization to vfio_pci.c Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:08 ` [PATCH 08/11] PCI: add flags field to pci_device_id structure Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:08 ` [PATCH 09/11] PCI: add matching checks for driver_override binding Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-08 21:26   ` Alex Williamson
2021-06-08 22:45     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-09  1:27       ` Alex Williamson
2021-06-09  9:26         ` Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-13  8:19         ` Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-14  5:40           ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-06-14  8:18             ` Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-14 15:27               ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-06-14 16:01                 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-14 16:15                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-06-14 16:33                     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-14 18:42           ` Alex Williamson
2021-06-14 23:12             ` Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-15 15:00               ` Alex Williamson
2021-06-15 15:04                 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-15 16:20                   ` Alex Williamson
2021-06-15 20:42                     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-15 21:59                       ` Alex Williamson
2021-06-15 23:00                         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-15 23:22                           ` Alex Williamson
2021-06-15 23:32                             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-16  0:22                               ` Alex Williamson [this message]
2021-06-16  0:34                                 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-16 23:28                                   ` Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-16 23:33                                     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-16 23:42                                       ` Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-16 23:44                                         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-16 23:51                                           ` Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-16 23:56                                             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-06-20 14:46                                               ` Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:08 ` [PATCH 10/11] vfio-pci: introduce vfio_pci_core subsystem driver Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-08 21:26   ` Alex Williamson
2021-06-09  9:29     ` Max Gurtovoy
2021-06-03 16:08 ` [PATCH 11/11] mlx5-vfio-pci: add new vfio_pci driver for mlx5 devices Max Gurtovoy
2021-07-30  7:53 ` [RFC PATCH v4 00/11] Introduce vfio-pci-core subsystem Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2021-07-30 11:55   ` Jason Gunthorpe

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210615182245.54944509.alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --to=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=ACurrid@nvidia.com \
    --cc=artemp@nvidia.com \
    --cc=aviadye@nvidia.com \
    --cc=cjia@nvidia.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kwankhede@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=liulongfang@huawei.com \
    --cc=mgurtovoy@nvidia.com \
    --cc=oren@nvidia.com \
    --cc=parav@nvidia.com \
    --cc=shahafs@nvidia.com \
    --cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
    --cc=targupta@nvidia.com \
    --cc=yan.y.zhao@intel.com \
    --cc=yishaih@nvidia.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 09/11] PCI: add matching checks for driver_override binding' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
on how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox