Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 27 Jan 2022 11:33:55 +0100 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] s390: vfio-ap: Register the vfio_ap module for the "ap" parent bus | From | Thomas Huth <> |
| |
On 14/12/2021 22.28, Tony Krowiak wrote: > > > On 12/13/21 10:44, Harald Freudenberger wrote: >> On 01.12.21 15:11, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> The crypto devices that we can use with the vfio_ap module are sitting >>> on the "ap" bus, not on the "vfio_ap" bus that the module defines >>> itself. With this change, the vfio_ap module now gets automatically >>> loaded if a supported crypto adapter is available in the host. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> Note: Marked as "RFC" since I'm not 100% sure about it ... >>> please review carefully! >>> >>> drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c >>> b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c >>> index 4d2556bc7fe5..5580e40608a4 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c >>> +++ b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c >>> @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ static struct ap_device_id ap_queue_ids[] = { >>> { /* end of sibling */ }, >>> }; >>> -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(vfio_ap, ap_queue_ids); >>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(ap, ap_queue_ids); >>> /** >>> * vfio_ap_queue_dev_probe: >> I had a chance to check this now. >> First I have to apologize about the dispute with vfio devices appearing on >> the ap bus. >> That's not the case with this patch. As Connie states the >> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE() does not >> change the parent of a device and vfio_ap_drv is a driver for ap devices >> and thus >> belongs to the ap bus anyway. >> So what's left is that with this change the vfio_ap kernel module is >> automatically loaded >> when an ap device type 10-13 is recognized by the ap bus. So the intention >> of the patch >> is fulfilled. >> Yet another kernel module which may occupy memory but will never get used >> by most customers. >> This may not be a problem but I had a glance at the list of kernel modules >> loaded on my >> LPAR with and without the patch and the difference is: >> ... >> kvm 512000 1 vfio_ap >> vfio_ap 28672 0 >> ... >> So the vfio_ap module has a dependency to the biggest kernel module ever - >> kvm. >> Do I need to say something more? >> >> If this dependency is removed then I would not hesitate to accept this >> patch. However >> this is up to Tony as he is the maintainer of the vfio ap device driver. > > The vfio_ap device driver has a dependency on kvm, it can not be removed. > If the user base for vfio_ap is minimal, then I see no reason why the vfio_ap > module should be automatically loaded when an AP device type 10-13 is > recognized by the AP bus. The module is needed only to pass through AP > queue devices to a KVM guest.
To continue the discussion here - it seems like my patch here won't be accepted? Shall I send another one instead to remove the bad MODLE_DEVICE_TABLE from the vfio_ap_drv.c file?
Thomas
|  |