Message ID | 20230219083908.40013-1-brett.creeley@amd.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | pds vfio driver | expand |
On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 12:39:01AM -0800, Brett Creeley wrote: > This is a draft patchset for a new vendor specific VFIO driver > (pds_vfio) for use with the AMD/Pensando Distributed Services Card > (DSC). This driver is device type agnostic and live migration is > supported as long as the underlying SR-IOV VF supports live migration > on the DSC. This driver is a client of the newly introduced pds_core > driver, which the latest version can be referenced at: Just as a broken clock: non-standard nvme live migration is not acceptable. Please work with the NVMe technical workning group to get this feature standardized. Note that despite various interested parties on linux lists I've seen exactly zero activity from the (not so) smart nic vendors active there.
On 2/19/2023 10:29 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 12:39:01AM -0800, Brett Creeley wrote: >> This is a draft patchset for a new vendor specific VFIO driver >> (pds_vfio) for use with the AMD/Pensando Distributed Services Card >> (DSC). This driver is device type agnostic and live migration is >> supported as long as the underlying SR-IOV VF supports live migration >> on the DSC. This driver is a client of the newly introduced pds_core >> driver, which the latest version can be referenced at: > > Just as a broken clock: non-standard nvme live migration is not > acceptable. Please work with the NVMe technical workning group to > get this feature standardized. Note that despite various interested > parties on linux lists I've seen exactly zero activity from the > (not so) smart nic vendors active there. You're right, we intend to work with the respective groups, and we removed any mention of NVMe from the series. However, this solution applies to our other PCI devices.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 04:45:51PM -0800, Brett Creeley wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 12:39:01AM -0800, Brett Creeley wrote: > > > This is a draft patchset for a new vendor specific VFIO driver > > > (pds_vfio) for use with the AMD/Pensando Distributed Services Card > > > (DSC). This driver is device type agnostic and live migration is > > > supported as long as the underlying SR-IOV VF supports live migration > > > on the DSC. This driver is a client of the newly introduced pds_core > > > driver, which the latest version can be referenced at: > > > > Just as a broken clock: non-standard nvme live migration is not > > acceptable. Please work with the NVMe technical workning group to > > get this feature standardized. Note that despite various interested > > parties on linux lists I've seen exactly zero activity from the > > (not so) smart nic vendors active there. > > > You're right, we intend to work with the respective groups, and we removed > any mention of NVMe from the series. However, this solution applies to our > other PCI devices. The first posting had a PCI ID that was literally only for NVMe and now suddenly this very same driver supports "other devices" with nary a mention of what those devices are? It strains credibility. List the exact IDs of these other devices in your PCI ID table and don't try to get away with a PCI_ANY_ID that just happens to match the NVMe device ID too. Keeping in mind that PCI IDs of the VF are not supposed to differ from the PF so this looks like a spec violation to me too :\ You have to remove the aux bus stuff also if you want this taken seriously. Either aux for all or aux for none, I don't want drivers making up their own stuff here. Especially since this implementation is wrongly locked and racy. Jason
On 2/20/2023 5:11 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 04:45:51PM -0800, Brett Creeley wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 12:39:01AM -0800, Brett Creeley wrote: >>>> This is a draft patchset for a new vendor specific VFIO driver >>>> (pds_vfio) for use with the AMD/Pensando Distributed Services Card >>>> (DSC). This driver is device type agnostic and live migration is >>>> supported as long as the underlying SR-IOV VF supports live migration >>>> on the DSC. This driver is a client of the newly introduced pds_core >>>> driver, which the latest version can be referenced at: >>> >>> Just as a broken clock: non-standard nvme live migration is not >>> acceptable. Please work with the NVMe technical workning group to >>> get this feature standardized. Note that despite various interested >>> parties on linux lists I've seen exactly zero activity from the >>> (not so) smart nic vendors active there. >> >> >> You're right, we intend to work with the respective groups, and we removed >> any mention of NVMe from the series. However, this solution applies to our >> other PCI devices. > > The first posting had a PCI ID that was literally only for NVMe and > now suddenly this very same driver supports "other devices" with nary > a mention of what those devices are? It strains credibility. > > List the exact IDs of these other devices in your PCI ID table and > don't try to get away with a PCI_ANY_ID that just happens to match the > NVMe device ID too. Okay, we'll look at revising/updating our VF device ID scheme for a specific VF and add that entry in the PCI ID table. > > Keeping in mind that PCI IDs of the VF are not supposed to differ from > the PF so this looks like a spec violation to me too :\ > > You have to remove the aux bus stuff also if you want this taken > seriously. Either aux for all or aux for none, I don't want drivers Can you please expand on the "aux for all or aux for none" comment? It's not clear what you mean here. > making up their own stuff here. Especially since this implementation > is wrongly locked and racy. Can you please provide more details on what's wrongly locked and racy? Thanks for the review. Brett > > Jason
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 11:01:33PM -0800, Brett Creeley wrote: > > You have to remove the aux bus stuff also if you want this taken > > seriously. Either aux for all or aux for none, I don't want drivers > > Can you please expand on the "aux for all or aux for none" comment? It's not > clear what you mean here. You shouldn't be using aux at all for this, but if you do figure out how to make it work right then all the drivers should be moved to use it. Jason