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=-6.3 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 88C54C433E0 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 18:14:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5413864E62 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 18:14:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232536AbhBKSE6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Feb 2021 13:04:58 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:31554 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232445AbhBKRlK (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Feb 2021 12:41:10 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1613065180; 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=trbDC0Yj/EmRrSd8Ug5X0sY/Ixv1JBY5u+dTjpRPajc=; b=Q3eVV+oaM1wHXayWQtjGw/ckLux+DB0+ZXxFzKt3qmHIfyWWDcf0hPk8lzmsULBQWQGjai 5YxzM8n2d4zNROoCJMXYZuUjXQkI4THOUzzrokc9WaHNVdOchl2QbsWn498ESuEbnOIMlw NjfRGZwmwtuSYDbgOasTzIoqQvdHkUI= 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-142-Kpj6XMQdMhunvbAtUlQBRQ-1; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 12:39:36 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Kpj6XMQdMhunvbAtUlQBRQ-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 17470801978; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:39:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin (ovpn-112-229.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.229]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 363975C239; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:39:27 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 18:39:24 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck To: Matthew Rosato Cc: Max Gurtovoy , Jason Gunthorpe , Alex Williamson , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, liranl@nvidia.com, oren@nvidia.com, tzahio@nvidia.com, leonro@nvidia.com, yarong@nvidia.com, aviadye@nvidia.com, shahafs@nvidia.com, artemp@nvidia.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com, ACurrid@nvidia.com, gmataev@nvidia.com, cjia@nvidia.com, yishaih@nvidia.com, aik@ozlabs.ru Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] vfio/pci: use x86 naming instead of igd Message-ID: <20210211183924.090ed3a9.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <9fc2b752-88a3-0607-00fc-cb7414dcd5f6@linux.ibm.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> <20210202171021.GW4247@nvidia.com> <9fc2b752-88a3-0607-00fc-cb7414dcd5f6@linux.ibm.com> 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 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 11:29:37 -0500 Matthew Rosato wrote: > On 2/11/21 10:47 AM, Max Gurtovoy wrote: > > > > On 2/2/2021 7:10 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 05:06:59PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >> > >>> On the other side, we have the zdev support, which both requires s390 > >>> and applies to any pci device on s390. > >> Is there a reason why CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV exists? Why not just always > >> return the s390 specific data in VFIO_DEVICE_GET_INFO if running on > >> s390? > >> > >> It would be like returning data from ACPI on other platforms. > > > > Agree. > > > > all agree that I remove it ? > > I did some archives digging on the discussions around > CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV and whether we should/should not have a Kconfig > switch around this; it was something that was carried over various > attempts to get the zdev support upstream, but I can't really find (or > think of) a compelling reason that a Kconfig switch must be kept for it. > The bottom line is if you're on s390, you really want zdev support. > > So: I don't have an objection so long as the net result is that > vfio_pci_zdev.o is always built in to vfio-pci(-core) for s390. Yes, I also don't expect presence of the zdev stuff to confuse any older userspace. So, let's just drop CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV and use CONFIG_S390 in lieu of it (not changing the file name).