[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] xen-pciback: prepare for the split for stub and PV
On 28.09.21 09:42, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 28.09.2021 06:18, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >> On Mon, 27 Sep 2021, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> On 27.09.21 09:35, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>> On 27.09.21 10:26, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 27.09.2021 08:58, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>>>> From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@xxxxxxxx> >>>>>> >>>>>> Currently PCI backend implements multiple functionalities at a time. >>>>>> To name a few: >>>>>> 1. It is used as a database for assignable PCI devices, e.g. xl >>>>>> pci-assignable-{add|remove|list} manipulates that list. So, >>>>>> whenever >>>>>> the toolstack needs to know which PCI devices can be passed through >>>>>> it reads that from the relevant sysfs entries of the pciback. >>>>>> 2. It is used to hold the unbound PCI devices list, e.g. when passing >>>>>> through a PCI device it needs to be unbound from the relevant >>>>>> device >>>>>> driver and bound to pciback (strictly speaking it is not required >>>>>> that the device is bound to pciback, but pciback is again used as a >>>>>> database of the passed through PCI devices, so we can re-bind the >>>>>> devices back to their original drivers when guest domain shuts >>>>>> down) >>>>>> 3. Device reset for the devices being passed through >>>>>> 4. Para-virtualised use-cases support >>>>>> >>>>>> The para-virtualised part of the driver is not always needed as some >>>>>> architectures, e.g. Arm or x86 PVH Dom0, are not using backend-frontend >>>>>> model for PCI device passthrough. For such use-cases make the very >>>>>> first step in splitting the xen-pciback driver into two parts: Xen >>>>>> PCI stub and PCI PV backend drivers. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Andrushchenko >>>>>> <oleksandr_andrushchenko@xxxxxxxx> >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> Changes since v3: >>>>>> - Move CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_STUB to the second patch >>>>> I'm afraid this wasn't fully done: >>>>> >>>>>> --- a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/Makefile >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/Makefile >>>>>> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ >>>>>> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 >>>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND) += xen-pciback.o >>>>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_STUB) += xen-pciback.o >>>>> While benign when added here, this addition still doesn't seem to >>>>> belong here. >>>> My bad. So, it seems without CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_STUB the change seems >>>> >>>> to be non-functional. With CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_STUB we fail to build on >>>> 32-bit >>>> >>>> architectures... >>>> >>>> What would be the preference here? Stefano suggested that we still define >>>> >>>> CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_STUB, but in disabled state, e.g. we add tristate to it >>>> >>>> in the second patch >>>> >>>> Another option is just to squash the two patches. >>> Squashing would be fine for me. >> >> It is fine for me to squash the two patches. >> >> But in any case, wouldn't it be better to modify that specific change to: >> >> diff --git a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/Makefile >> b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/Makefile >> index e2cb376444a6..e23c758b85ae 100644 >> --- a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/Makefile >> +++ b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/Makefile >> @@ -1,6 +1,5 @@ >> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 >> -obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND) += xen-pciback.o >> -obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_STUB) += xen-pciback.o >> +obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_PCI_STUB) += xen-pciback.o > But that wouldn't allow the driver to be a module anymore, would it? Exactly. I forgot that when playing with module/built-in I was not able to control that anymore because CONFIG_XEN_PCI_STUB will always be in "y" state, thus even if you have CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND=m you won't be able to build it as module. So, I will probably put a comment about that in the Makefile explaining the need for obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND) += xen-pciback.o obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_STUB) += xen-pciback.o > > Jan > Thank you, Oleksandr
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |