lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 1/9] vfio/pci: introduce mediate ops to intercept vfio-pci ops
> > > > Currently, yes, i40e has build dependency on vfio-pci.
> > > > It's like this, if i40e decides to support SRIOV and compiles in vf
> > > > related code who depends on vfio-pci, it will also have build dependency
> > > > on vfio-pci. isn't it natural?
> > >
> > > No, this is not natural. There are certainly i40e VF use cases that
> > > have no interest in vfio and having dependencies between the two
> > > modules is unacceptable. I think you probably want to modularize the
> > > i40e vfio support code and then perhaps register a table in vfio-pci
> > > that the vfio-pci code can perform a module request when using a
> > > compatible device. Just and idea, there might be better options. I
> > > will not accept a solution that requires unloading the i40e driver in
> > > order to unload the vfio-pci driver. It's inconvenient with just one
> > > NIC driver, imagine how poorly that scales.
> > >
> > what about this way:
> > mediate driver registers a module notifier and every time when
> > vfio_pci is loaded, register to vfio_pci its mediate ops?
> > (Just like in below sample code)
> > This way vfio-pci is free to unload and this registering only gives
> > vfio-pci a name of what module to request.
> > After that,
> > in vfio_pci_open(), vfio-pci requests the mediate driver. (or puts
> > the mediate driver when mediate driver does not support mediating the
> > device)
> > in vfio_pci_release(), vfio-pci puts the mediate driver.
> >
> > static void register_mediate_ops(void)
> > {
> > int (*func)(struct vfio_pci_mediate_ops *ops) = NULL;
> >
> > func = symbol_get(vfio_pci_register_mediate_ops);
> >
> > if (func) {
> > func(&igd_dt_ops);
> > symbol_put(vfio_pci_register_mediate_ops);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > static int igd_module_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
> > unsigned long val, void *data)
> > {
> > struct module *mod = data;
> > int ret = 0;
> >
> > switch (val) {
> > case MODULE_STATE_LIVE:
> > if (!strcmp(mod->name, "vfio_pci"))
> > register_mediate_ops();
> > break;
> > case MODULE_STATE_GOING:
> > break;
> > default:
> > break;
> > }
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > static struct notifier_block igd_module_nb = {
> > .notifier_call = igd_module_notify,
> > .priority = 0,
> > };
> >
> >
> >
> > static int __init igd_dt_init(void)
> > {
> > ...
> > register_mediate_ops();
> > register_module_notifier(&igd_module_nb);
> > ...
> > return 0;
> > }
>
>
> No, this is bad. Please look at MODULE_ALIAS() and request_module() as
> used in the vfio-platform for loading reset driver modules. I think
> the correct approach is that vfio-pci should perform a request_module()
> based on the device being probed. Having the mediation provider
> listening for vfio-pci and registering itself regardless of whether we
> intend to use it assumes that we will want to use it and assumes that
> the mediation provider module is already loaded. We should be able to
> support demand loading of modules that may serve no other purpose than
> providing this mediation. Thanks,
hi Alex
Thanks for this message.
So is it good to create a separate module as mediation provider driver,
and alias its module name to "vfio-pci-mediate-vid-did".
Then when vfio-pci probes the device, it requests module of that name ?

Thanks
Yan

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-10 03:52    [W:0.065 / U:32.412 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site