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=-6.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,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 9F493C433E0 for ; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 20:45:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79CC464F61 for ; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 20:45:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233193AbhBBUp0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:45:26 -0500 Received: from hqnvemgate26.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.65]:16926 "EHLO hqnvemgate26.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231508AbhBBUpV (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:45:21 -0500 Received: from hqmail.nvidia.com (Not Verified[216.228.121.13]) by hqnvemgate26.nvidia.com (using TLS: TLSv1.2, AES256-SHA) id ; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 12:44:41 -0800 Received: from HKMAIL101.nvidia.com (10.18.16.10) by HQMAIL107.nvidia.com (172.20.187.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 20:44:39 +0000 Received: from HKMAIL103.nvidia.com (10.18.16.12) by HKMAIL101.nvidia.com (10.18.16.10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 20:44:37 +0000 Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.57.169) by HKMAIL103.nvidia.com (10.18.16.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 20:44:36 +0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=SsdecvKRqThP450ljVO7YwhTvBzEg2hy5hYbYGw1Fib5LQSlnFVL1WFzMOBR81TL11RKjp76shx8aDmMx0bmTbD4aK+/FO35W6NliA8L6JxnPVNYUy2zMZeqyKUbDCaShvIgLHyZtP3HxdqicvpC85AY4jK3I2+2kRG7QVDgoPaNnlPOcuAL0e3kVgbEGHFMS52sNcEXKYwriqZJV+ugrhFp/pukFzDDpyvGiQ9WESJGHyoAks57ympwWA/M95GMl/Yc+Q4BccvFUJ1xMzhmCQuilHVwgwkjcrnREQR8D8ySRnSOecjIcGqa4JBKJHfhPQlOs2K4Did11f66KUEcAw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=WOQRACzq9RM+7ec/Ovq6IaqY6eedpCrqd5zerWgGhxY=; b=SVFhgEt+k1oEwHgJSmzddPVhvDdQ6nIzA6o2UJ24urMqfLQqf9ApfanHJ1jr/3kf4wSwbn0Nd4ERhWSTiyA1VlL0a+fAsRP/weVWeDVYa7yNLvdGemyFsTZI8waWO2ZOeY/smo4ZREH8B+3Lf/jw6Ppc8Dza4s/9YVfUqD/9srg02gviJWEkdHPA9vFdJQS0daV3Wzf45RGmnmy65b56W/pPA9/kTIu8icNDXm6daO3PPixK+vpbP4w7z0SbrdsEoB3zuj139h50aX6qhK2/popX3k936LiKoBjAk5BgAa715hdGlXioNwU0faOtK/H3y4IvgvtdBG8JQrv+420ciA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nvidia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nvidia.com; arc=none Received: from DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:14a::12) by DM5PR12MB1339.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:70::14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3805.19; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 20:44:34 +0000 Received: from DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d6b:736:fa28:5e4]) by DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d6b:736:fa28:5e4%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3805.025; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 20:44:34 +0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 16:44:32 -0400 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: Alex Williamson CC: Max Gurtovoy , Cornelia Huck , Matthew Rosato , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] vfio/pci: use x86 naming instead of igd Message-ID: <20210202204432.GC4247@nvidia.com> References: <20210201162828.5938-1-mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> <20210201162828.5938-9-mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> <20210201181454.22112b57.cohuck@redhat.com> <599c6452-8ba6-a00a-65e7-0167f21eac35@linux.ibm.com> <20210201114230.37c18abd@omen.home.shazbot.org> <20210202170659.1c62a9e8.cohuck@redhat.com> <20210202105455.5a358980@omen.home.shazbot.org> <20210202185017.GZ4247@nvidia.com> <20210202123723.6cc018b8@omen.home.shazbot.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210202123723.6cc018b8@omen.home.shazbot.org> X-ClientProxiedBy: MN2PR19CA0045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:19b::22) To DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:14a::12) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from mlx.ziepe.ca (142.162.115.133) by MN2PR19CA0045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:19b::22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3805.17 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 20:44:33 +0000 Received: from jgg by mlx with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1l72XI-002jxP-AE; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 16:44:32 -0400 X-Header: ProcessedBy-CMR-outbound DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nvidia.com; s=n1; t=1612298681; bh=WOQRACzq9RM+7ec/Ovq6IaqY6eedpCrqd5zerWgGhxY=; h=ARC-Seal:ARC-Message-Signature:ARC-Authentication-Results:Date: From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:X-ClientProxiedBy:MIME-Version: X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType:X-Header; b=ARmreLUE3EUqnxMTEv4NF9uVmziCsFJXtzoAms3by17nODKmXrG0NF3YytJSkU9Xf FHZQnvHzMMk/utfDcyPrpLlSmVKcZJUMhg2Q8ey6RnPnutoBSaZm/5WweP+PU6igtE mJsK1xCqi7eUTdH55wcja4wF6Jd2bl9YvLeKrCPqZbMAV+Jf5lglx0mwGyzSazR3yT ceT7dr+FVKqvCfKwnl1GuuIK6F8/yNtSrc8CLJrVziXAP+XbElmtw8ykKK2nNwzlFM b+ScB3rSS0znQlTDcLqTpaWxWys9jaFbdTBD7jKr5zV/FcVxDplmuGjQ3MhP3W5t5A lF6YlWTjZBf5w== Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 12:37:23PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote: > For the most part, this explicit bind interface is redundant to > driver_override, which already avoids the duplicate ID issue. No, the point here is to have the ID tables in the PCI drivers because they fundamentally only work with their supported IDs. The normal driver core ID tables are a replacement for all the hardwired if's in vfio_pci. driver_override completely disables all the ID checking, it seems only useful for vfio_pci which works with everything. It should not be used with something like nvlink_vfio_pci.ko that needs ID checking. Yes, this DRIVER_EXPLICIT_BIND_ONLY idea somewhat replaces driver_override because we could set the PCI any match on vfio_pci and manage the driver binding explicitly instead. > A driver id table doesn't really help for binding the device, > ultimately even if a device is in the id table it might fail to > probe due to the missing platform support that each of these igd and > nvlink drivers expose, What happens depends on what makes sense for the driver, some missing optional support could continue without it, or it could fail. IGD and nvlink can trivially go onwards and work if they don't find the platform support. Or they might want to fail, I think the mlx5 and probably nvlink drivers should fail as they are intended to be coupled with userspace that expects to use their extended features. In those cases failing is a feature because it prevents the whole system from going into an unexpected state. Jason