Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH V10 6/6] docs: sample driver to demonstrate how to implement virtio-mdev framework | From | Jason Wang <> | Date | Thu, 7 Nov 2019 22:20:43 +0800 |
| |
On 2019/11/7 下午9:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 09:32:29PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> On 2019/11/7 下午9:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 08:43:29PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >>>> On 2019/11/7 下午7:21, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 06:18:45PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >>>>>> On 2019/11/7 下午5:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 09:35:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >>>>>>>> This sample driver creates mdev device that simulate virtio net device >>>>>>>> over virtio mdev transport. The device is implemented through vringh >>>>>>>> and workqueue. A device specific dma ops is to make sure HVA is used >>>>>>>> directly as the IOVA. This should be sufficient for kernel virtio >>>>>>>> driver to work. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Only 'virtio' type is supported right now. I plan to add 'vhost' type >>>>>>>> on top which requires some virtual IOMMU implemented in this sample >>>>>>>> driver. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Acked-by: Cornelia Huck<cohuck@redhat.com> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang<jasowang@redhat.com> >>>>>>> I'd prefer it that we call this something else, e.g. >>>>>>> mvnet-loopback. Just so people don't expect a fully >>>>>>> functional device somehow. Can be renamed when applying? >>>>>> Actually, I plan to extend it as another standard network interface for >>>>>> kernel. It could be either a standalone pseudo device or a stack device. >>>>>> Does this sounds good to you? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>> That's a big change in an interface so it's a good reason >>>>> to rename the driver at that point right? >>>>> Oherwise users of an old kernel would expect a stacked driver >>>>> and get a loopback instead. >>>>> >>>>> Or did I miss something? >>>> My understanding is that it was a sample driver in /doc. It should not be >>>> used in production environment. Otherwise we need to move it to >>>> driver/virtio. >>>> >>>> But if you insist, I can post a V11. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>> this can be a patch on top. >> Then maybe it's better just extend it to work as a normal networking device >> on top? >> >> Thanks > That would be a substantial change. Maybe drop 6/6 for now until > we have a better handle on this? >
Ok, consider the change should be small, I will post V11 where I can fix the typos spotted.
Thanks
| |