From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f169.google.com (mail-pf0-f169.google.com [209.85.192.169]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A060E8D8F for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 14:09:13 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pf0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 65so157796869pff.2 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 05:09:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mvista-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ecqgcwPo0tXXvXEZFRBZIoEhxbsGS/+J0A2gjn1KDZ4=; b=Q+Yab8YNTVMwv6nGZdNmjo3/r7w7HvgYJvSX49HRrSO91qFOYVvP8n6ZBqnwFcvFiB b8zHclHu97aHgesGLac38CNvXqVw2wwVZhzLygD9wIi+XtK11gxATxAhd5kb50f7TX9/ yTakodyBA1EQe3xMljY19acl9iwgr6HmlDyJ02G0ycgmo9ed9Tx6pel88LBlcHhD4kTT UgtQcWVOC2Giw4s9OkvPaTEjPa+sKGre1SppSwlqbv5eCBEqibxUY0OA5n5TVSb57fih jIsI8eEj4kIt8qWJEQhFaNJAxA1ALE7IQ5alsQDETdbaStxSrim7F70zyV6Rwib+HxU7 60Wg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ecqgcwPo0tXXvXEZFRBZIoEhxbsGS/+J0A2gjn1KDZ4=; b=YOYa9y0wlbFUjzzIOyQq4SbGqd6CJgvvqc2mfewsrI5mcsZbG3x0ztmmqsTwJmLDiz oCs1xKk0zpo+U82iQVrRmnmt1t3jJVtlyqSXV7WpRaiFYADKU8CuFkDjpXIFE3wVPvxe 8GtSeAonn3HQxIb/jRxdp5R219Qo44WeE5TjmV2PwfY+2f6qR+mYeUs2ljDGj9hSB+I5 PXtEtyf9NANcuOYsrFLy9cmhWAexwyx5hYYntFoo2fZshJ7DEZiWx5fBxnZXW0VNM5IB nE/S+aODXrX2vLhSF7w9HGs94HhzmxLI7M6iPt4oc/2NBNfMbw0EIGmZnKWZrRpojB9D Z7iA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkO9SzzLACgeuMHuPqG0cY/iIcGKpxPY+65qvrxs9qAztKvuVf4ZSQztHcyZq3T2UIFdJz3ZI8DitGGQ79tjFyCFHBFJYaEsRNzzKJ/WpWs8BwaKz8= MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.98.42.81 with SMTP id q78mr35820942pfq.142.1453122553032; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 05:09:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.196.81 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 05:09:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20160118071754.GY19531@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> References: <1452778117-30178-1-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com> <1452778117-30178-9-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com> <20160115062726.GS19531@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <20160118061125.GW19531@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <20160118071754.GY19531@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:39:12 +0530 Message-ID: From: Santosh Shukla To: Yuanhan Liu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 08/14] virtio: pci: extend virtio pci rw api for vfio interface X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:09:13 -0000 On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 12:15:40PM +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote: >> I am testing for virtio 1.0 and 0.95 for arm including your patch, >> soon we;ll post the patch series that is rebased on / dependent on >> below patchset: >> - virtio 1.0 >> - vfio-noiommu >> - KDRV check by huawei >> >> IMO, we should start merging the dependent patches as because I'll > > Yep, agreed. That's why I was keep pushing Huawei for ACK and > validation team for testing, although I have tested that. :) > >> have to rebase, then do regression across the platform at least for >> x86/arm64 and it's quite a work now. >> >> Beside that I have few question specific to vfio in virtio pmd driver; >> - vfio don't need resource_init functionality as it uses struct >> rte_pci_dev but it need parsing so to make sure >> 1. user has setted no_iommu mode >> 2. virtio pci device attached to vfio-no-iommu driver or not. >> >> So for 1) I am thinking to add RTE_KDRV_VFIO_NOIOMMU mode and a helper >> function like pci_vfio_is_iommu(), such that pc_xxx_scan() function >> updates dev->kdrv with RTE_KDRV_VFIO_NOIOMMU at driver probe time. > > That sounds better to me. And that's also what I want to comment on > your another patch [09/14], that we should try to avoid getting UIO/VFIO > stuff inside virtio pmd driver, unless it's a must. (yes, I know > UIO is already an example here, but I don't like it, and badly, I don't > have the time to check if I can remove it.) > Understood, So I'm moving possible required driver/parsing check in eal_pci.c rather keeping it in virtio, as those parsing/driver dependency checks are generic, has nothing to do with virtio. >> >> case 2) would check for _noiommu mode and then would verify that >> driver is attached or not? > > Sorry, very limited VFIO and noiommu knowledge, and I can't answer, so > far. > > --yliu >> >> above two case applicable to both virtio spec 1.0 and 0.95. I have >> done changes for those two case for v5 patch series,l any comment >> welcome before I push patch for review. >> >> Thanks.