Displaying 8 results from an estimated 8 matches for "mdev_id".
Did you mean:
dev_id
2013 Aug 12
1
[PATCH v2 1/7] Intel MIC Host Driver for X100 family.
...e embedded inside here, instead of a pointer?
> + struct mic_mw aper;
> +};
> +/**
> + * struct mic_info - Global information about all MIC devices.
> + *
> + * @next_id: Next available MIC device id.
> + * @mic_class: Class of MIC devices for sysfs accessibility.
> + * @mdev_id: Base device node number.
> + */
> +struct mic_info {
> + int next_id;
Please use the idr interface, don't roll your own, odds are you got it
wrong, and I don't want to have to debug it :(
> + struct class *mic_class;
Isn't this a global symbol that you have (or static sy...
2013 Aug 12
1
[PATCH v2 1/7] Intel MIC Host Driver for X100 family.
...e embedded inside here, instead of a pointer?
> + struct mic_mw aper;
> +};
> +/**
> + * struct mic_info - Global information about all MIC devices.
> + *
> + * @next_id: Next available MIC device id.
> + * @mic_class: Class of MIC devices for sysfs accessibility.
> + * @mdev_id: Base device node number.
> + */
> +struct mic_info {
> + int next_id;
Please use the idr interface, don't roll your own, odds are you got it
wrong, and I don't want to have to debug it :(
> + struct class *mic_class;
Isn't this a global symbol that you have (or static sy...
2013 Aug 08
0
[PATCH v2 1/7] Intel MIC Host Driver for X100 family.
...MIC_X100_PCI_DEVICE_225e)},
+
+ /* required last entry */
+ { 0, }
+};
+
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, mic_pci_tbl);
+
+/**
+ * struct mic_info - Global information about all MIC devices.
+ *
+ * @next_id: Next available MIC device id.
+ * @mic_class: Class of MIC devices for sysfs accessibility.
+ * @mdev_id: Base device node number.
+ */
+struct mic_info {
+ int next_id;
+ struct class *mic_class;
+ dev_t mdev_id;
+};
+
+/* g_mic - Global information about all MIC devices. */
+static struct mic_info g_mic;
+
+/**
+ * mic_ops_init: Initialize HW specific operation tables.
+ *
+ * @mdev: pointer to mic_...
2019 Sep 20
1
[RFC v4 0/3] vhost: introduce mdev based hardware backend
...posed in ...
> > ... https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/9/12/151 ...
>
>
> To clarify, this should be done through the id_table fields in
> vhost_mdev_driver, and it should claim it supports virtio-mdev device only:
>
>
> static struct mdev_class_id id_table[] = {
> ??? { MDEV_ID_VIRTIO },
> ??? { 0 },
> };
>
>
> static struct mdev_driver vhost_mdev_driver = {
> ??? ...
> ??? .id_table = id_table,
> }
In this way, both of virtio-mdev and vhost-mdev will try to
take this device. We may want a way to let vhost-mdev take this
device only when users e...
2013 Aug 08
10
[PATCH v2 0/7] Enable Drivers for Intel MIC X100 Coprocessors.
ChangeLog:
=========
v1 => v2:
a) License wording cleanup, sysfs ABI documentation, patch 1 refactoring
into 3 smaller patches and function renames, as per feedback from
Greg Kroah-Hartman.
b) Use VRINGH infrastructure for accessing virtio rings from the host
in patch 5, as per feedback from Michael S. Tsirkin.
v1: Initial post @ https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/24/810
Description:
2013 Aug 08
10
[PATCH v2 0/7] Enable Drivers for Intel MIC X100 Coprocessors.
ChangeLog:
=========
v1 => v2:
a) License wording cleanup, sysfs ABI documentation, patch 1 refactoring
into 3 smaller patches and function renames, as per feedback from
Greg Kroah-Hartman.
b) Use VRINGH infrastructure for accessing virtio rings from the host
in patch 5, as per feedback from Michael S. Tsirkin.
v1: Initial post @ https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/24/810
Description:
2019 Sep 19
3
[RFC v4 0/3] vhost: introduce mdev based hardware backend
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 09:08:11PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On 2019/9/18 ??10:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > So I have some questions:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) Compared to method 2, what's the advantage of creating a new vhost char
> > > > > device? I guess it's for keep the API compatibility?
> > > > One
2019 Sep 19
3
[RFC v4 0/3] vhost: introduce mdev based hardware backend
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 09:08:11PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On 2019/9/18 ??10:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > So I have some questions:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) Compared to method 2, what's the advantage of creating a new vhost char
> > > > > device? I guess it's for keep the API compatibility?
> > > > One