Virtualization - Nov 2022 - [PATCH 0/4] ifcvf/vDPA implement features provisioning

On 11/9/2022 4:59 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 4:14 PM Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu at
intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/9/2022 2:51 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 5:42 PM Zhu Lingshan <lingshan.zhu at
intel.com> wrote:
>>>> This series implements features provisioning for ifcvf.
>>>> By applying this series, we allow userspace to create
>>>> a vDPA device with selected (management device supported)
>>>> feature bits and mask out others.
>>> I don't see a direct relationship between the first 3 and the
last.
>>> Maybe you can state the reason why the restructure is a must for
the
>>> feature provisioning. Otherwise, we'd better split the series.
>> When introducing features provisioning ability to ifcvf, there is a
need
>> to re-create vDPA devices
>> on a VF with different feature bits.
> This seems a requirement even without feature provisioning? Device
> could be deleted from the management device anyhow.
Yes, we need this to delete and re-create a vDPA device.

We create vDPA device from a VF, so without features provisioning 
requirements,
we don't need to re-create the vDPA device. But with features provisioning,
it is a must now.

Thanks

>
> Thakns
>
>> When remove a vDPA device, the container of struct vdpa_device (here is
>> ifcvf_adapter) is free-ed in
>> dev_del() interface, so we need to allocate ifcvf_adapter in dev_add()
>> than in probe(). That's
>> why I have re-factored the adapter/mgmt_dev code.
>>
>> For re-factoring the irq related code and ifcvf_base, let them work on
>> struct ifcvf_hw, the
>> reason is that the adapter is allocated in dev_add(), if we want theses
>> functions to work
>> before dev_add(), like in probe, we need them work on ifcvf_hw than the
>> adapter.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Zhu Lingshan
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>> Please help review
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Zhu Lingshan (4):
>>>>     vDPA/ifcvf: ifcvf base layer interfaces work on struct
ifcvf_hw
>>>>     vDPA/ifcvf: IRQ interfaces work on ifcvf_hw
>>>>     vDPA/ifcvf: allocate ifcvf_adapter in dev_add()
>>>>     vDPA/ifcvf: implement features provisioning
>>>>
>>>>    drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.c |  32 ++-----
>>>>    drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.h |  10 +-
>>>>    drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c | 156
+++++++++++++++-----------------
>>>>    3 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 109 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 2.31.1
>>>>

On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 5:06 PM Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu at intel.com>
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/9/2022 4:59 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 4:14 PM Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu at
intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/9/2022 2:51 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 5:42 PM Zhu Lingshan <lingshan.zhu
at intel.com> wrote:
> >>>> This series implements features provisioning for ifcvf.
> >>>> By applying this series, we allow userspace to create
> >>>> a vDPA device with selected (management device supported)
> >>>> feature bits and mask out others.
> >>> I don't see a direct relationship between the first 3 and
the last.
> >>> Maybe you can state the reason why the restructure is a must
for the
> >>> feature provisioning. Otherwise, we'd better split the
series.
> >> When introducing features provisioning ability to ifcvf, there is
a need
> >> to re-create vDPA devices
> >> on a VF with different feature bits.
> > This seems a requirement even without feature provisioning? Device
> > could be deleted from the management device anyhow.
> Yes, we need this to delete and re-create a vDPA device.
I wonder if we need something that works for -stable.

AFAIK, we can move the vdpa_alloc_device() from probe() to dev_add()
and it seems to work?

Thanks
>
> We create vDPA device from a VF, so without features provisioning
> requirements,
> we don't need to re-create the vDPA device. But with features
provisioning,
> it is a must now.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> >
> > Thakns
> >
> >> When remove a vDPA device, the container of struct vdpa_device
(here is
> >> ifcvf_adapter) is free-ed in
> >> dev_del() interface, so we need to allocate ifcvf_adapter in
dev_add()
> >> than in probe(). That's
> >> why I have re-factored the adapter/mgmt_dev code.
> >>
> >> For re-factoring the irq related code and ifcvf_base, let them
work on
> >> struct ifcvf_hw, the
> >> reason is that the adapter is allocated in dev_add(), if we want
theses
> >> functions to work
> >> before dev_add(), like in probe, we need them work on ifcvf_hw
than the
> >> adapter.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Zhu Lingshan
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>>> Please help review
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>>
> >>>> Zhu Lingshan (4):
> >>>>     vDPA/ifcvf: ifcvf base layer interfaces work on struct
ifcvf_hw
> >>>>     vDPA/ifcvf: IRQ interfaces work on ifcvf_hw
> >>>>     vDPA/ifcvf: allocate ifcvf_adapter in dev_add()
> >>>>     vDPA/ifcvf: implement features provisioning
> >>>>
> >>>>    drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.c |  32 ++-----
> >>>>    drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_base.h |  10 +-
> >>>>    drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c | 156
+++++++++++++++-----------------
> >>>>    3 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 109 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> 2.31.1
> >>>>
>