On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 2:41 PM Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@ozlabs.ru> wrote: > > > > On 15/07/2020 14:21, Oliver O'Halloran wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 2:00 PM Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@ozlabs.ru> wrote: > >> > >> > >> or we could just skip setting > >> > >> ppc_md.pcibios_sriov_enable = pnv_pcibios_sriov_enable; > >> > >> for uninteresting platforms in pnv_pci_init_ioda_phb(). > > > > I don't think so. ppc_md is per-platform, not per-PHB andw e still > > have to deal with a mixture of IODA/NVLink/OpenCAPI PHBs on a single > > system. > > NVLink/OpenCAPI won't have SRIOV devices.
...OR WILL THEY? > Other types won't appear on > the same platform simultaneously. It is not too clean, yes. Sure, my point is that's a per-PHB setting rather than a per-platform one so we should set it up like that. > > We could make it a callback in pnv_phb, but it seemed like > > more indirection than it's worth. > > I genuinely dislike how we use ppc_md so removing things from it is > definitely a good thing. you wouldn't be able to get rid of it. We'd have something like what we have for the existing pcibios calls where there's a "generic" one that bounces it to a member of pci_controller_ops, which then bounces it to the pnv_phb method. It's bad and I hate it. > > > -- > Alexey
