From: Boris Ostrovsky <email@example.com> To: Jan Beulich <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Juergen Gross <email@example.com>, Konrad Wilk <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] xen-pciback: redo VF placement in the virtual topology Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 18:28:31 -0400 [thread overview] Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> On 4/7/21 10:37 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > The commit referenced below was incomplete: It merely affected what > would get written to the vdev-<N> xenstore node. The guest would still > find the function at the original function number as long as > __xen_pcibk_get_pci_dev() wouldn't be in sync. The same goes for AER wrt > __xen_pcibk_get_pcifront_dev(). > > Undo overriding the function to zero and instead make sure that VFs at > function zero remain alone in their slot. This has the added benefit of > improving overall capacity, considering that there's only a total of 32 > slots available right now (PCI segment and bus can both only ever be > zero at present). > > Fixes: 8a5248fe10b1 ("xen PV passthru: assign SR-IOV virtual functions to separate virtual slots") > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <email@example.com> > Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org > --- > Like the original change this has the effect of changing where devices > would appear in the guest, when there are multiple of them. I don't see > an immediate problem with this, but if there is we may need to reduce > the effect of the change. > Taking into account, besides the described breakage, how xen-pcifront's > pcifront_scan_bus() works, I also wonder what problem it was in the > first place that needed fixing. It may therefore also be worth to > consider simply reverting the original change. Perhaps this is no longer a problem, it's been 9 years since that patch. Have you tried reverting to 8a5248fe10b101104d92d01438f918e899414fd1~1 and testing that? -boris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-08 22:28 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-04-07 14:35 [PATCH 0/3] xen-pciback: a fix, a workaround, and some simplification Jan Beulich 2021-04-07 14:37 ` [PATCH 1/3] xen-pciback: redo VF placement in the virtual topology Jan Beulich 2021-04-08 22:28 ` Boris Ostrovsky [this message] 2021-04-09 8:16 ` Jan Beulich 2021-04-07 14:37 ` [PATCH 2/3] xen-pciback: reconfigure also from backend watch handler Jan Beulich 2021-04-09 21:43 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2021-04-12 9:44 ` Jan Beulich 2021-04-12 15:55 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2021-04-07 14:37 ` [PATCH 3/3] xen-pciback: simplify vpci's find hook Jan Beulich 2021-04-09 21:45 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2021-04-12 9:50 ` Jan Beulich 2021-04-12 16:05 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2021-04-13 8:09 ` Jan Beulich 2021-04-13 12:54 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2021-04-23 8:05 ` Juergen Gross
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 \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --subject='Re: [PATCH 1/3] xen-pciback: redo VF placement in the virtual topology' \ /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 for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).