Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 5 Nov 2020 08:33:02 +0100 | From | gregkh <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH mlx5-next v1 06/11] vdpa/mlx5: Connect mlx5_vdpa to auxiliary bus |
| |
On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 03:21:23PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 7:45 AM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca> wrote: > [..] > > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(auxiliary, mlx5v_id_table); > > > + > > > +static struct auxiliary_driver mlx5v_driver = { > > > + .name = "vnet", > > > + .probe = mlx5v_probe, > > > + .remove = mlx5v_remove, > > > + .id_table = mlx5v_id_table, > > > +}; > > > > It is hard to see from the diff, but when this patch is applied the > > vdpa module looks like I imagined things would look with the auxiliary > > bus. It is very similar in structure to a PCI driver with the probe() > > function cleanly registering with its subsystem. This is what I'd like > > to see from the new Intel RDMA driver. > > > > Greg, I think this patch is the best clean usage example. > > > > I've looked over this series and it has the right idea and > > parts. There is definitely more that can be done to improve mlx5 in > > this area, but this series is well scoped and cleans a good part of > > it. > > Greg? > > I know you alluded to going your own way if the auxiliary bus patches > did not shape up soon, but it seems they have and the stakeholders > have reached this consensus point. > > Were there any additional changes you wanted to see happen? I'll go > give the final set another once over, but David has been diligently > fixing up all the declared major issues so I expect to find at most > minor incremental fixups.
This is in my to-review pile, along with a load of other stuff at the moment: $ ~/bin/mdfrm -c ~/mail/todo/ 1709 messages in /home/gregkh/mail/todo/
So give me a chance. There is no rush on my side for this given the huge delays that have happened here on the authorship side many times in the past :)
If you can review it, or anyone else, that is always most appreciated.
thanks,
greg k-h
| |