o.org; santosh.shu...@linaro.org;
> > k...@vger.kernel.org; gre...@linuxfoundation.org
> > Subject: Re: RFC: (re-)binding the VFIO platform driver to a platform device
> >
> > On Wed, 9 Oct 2013 15:03:19 -0500
> > Scott Wood wrote:
> >
> > > On
x Williamson;
> > linux-
> > ker...@vger.kernel.org; a.mota...@virtualopensystems.com; ag...@suse.de;
> > Sethi
> > Varun-B16395; Bhushan Bharat-R65777; peter.mayd...@linaro.org;
> > santosh.shu...@linaro.org; k...@vger.kernel.org; gre...@linuxfoundation.org
> >
opensystems.com;
> ag...@suse.de; Sethi Varun-B16395; peter.mayd...@linaro.org;
> santosh.shu...@linaro.org; k...@vger.kernel.org; gre...@linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: (re-)binding the VFIO platform driver to a platform device
>
> On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 02:4
> I am trying to understand what you are proposing here (example "DEVICE"
> can be handled by "DRIVER1" and "VFIO-PLATFORM-DRIVER"):
> - By default drv->explicit_bind_only will be clear in all drivers.
> - By default device->explicit_bind_only will also be clear for all
> devices.
> - On boot, m
o.org;
> alex.william...@redhat.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> a.mota...@virtualopensystems.com; ag...@suse.de; Sethi Varun-B16395; Bhushan
> Bharat-R65777; peter.mayd...@linaro.org; santosh.shu...@linaro.org;
> k...@vger.kernel.org; gre...@linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: (re-)b
.de; Sethi
> Varun-B16395; Bhushan Bharat-R65777; peter.mayd...@linaro.org;
> santosh.shu...@linaro.org; k...@vger.kernel.org; gre...@linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: (re-)binding the VFIO platform driver to a platform device
>
> On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 14:44
On Wed, 9 Oct 2013 15:03:19 -0500
Scott Wood wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 14:44 -0500, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
> > > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 2:22 PM
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 14:02 -0500, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
> > > > Have been thinking a
Alex Williamson;
> > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; a.mota...@virtualopensystems.com;
> > ag...@suse.de; Sethi Varun-B16395; Bhushan Bharat-R65777;
> > peter.mayd...@linaro.org; santosh.shu...@linaro.org; k...@vger.kernel.org;
> > gre...@linuxfoundation.org
> > Subject: Re: RFC:
On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 12:16 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 07:02:25PM +, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
> > Have been thinking about this issue some more. As Scott mentioned,
> > 'wildcard' matching for a driver can be fairly done in the platform
> > bus driver.
@suse.de; Sethi Varun-B16395; Bhushan Bharat-R65777;
> peter.mayd...@linaro.org; santosh.shu...@linaro.org; k...@vger.kernel.org;
> gre...@linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: (re-)binding the VFIO platform driver to a platform
> device
>
> On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 14:02 -0500, Y
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 07:02:25PM +, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
> Have been thinking about this issue some more. As Scott mentioned,
> 'wildcard' matching for a driver can be fairly done in the platform
> bus driver. We could add a new flag to the platform driver struct:
>
> diff --git a/dr
On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 14:02 -0500, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
> Have been thinking about this issue some more. As Scott mentioned,
> 'wildcard' matching for a driver can be fairly done in the platform
> bus driver. We could add a new flag to the platform driver struct:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/b
Have been thinking about this issue some more. As Scott mentioned,
'wildcard' matching for a driver can be fairly done in the platform
bus driver. We could add a new flag to the platform driver struct:
diff --git a/drivers/base/platform.c b/drivers/base/platform.c
index 4f8bef3..4d6cf14 100644
-
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 02:11:34PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-10-03 at 11:54 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 01:33:27PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > > What it looks like we do still want from the driver core is the ability
> > > for a driver to say
On Thu, 2013-10-03 at 11:54 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 01:33:27PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > What it looks like we do still want from the driver core is the ability
> > for a driver to say that it should not be bound to a device except via
> > explicit sysf
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 01:33:27PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> What it looks like we do still want from the driver core is the ability
> for a driver to say that it should not be bound to a device except via
> explicit sysfs bind,
You can do that today by not providing any device ids in your driver
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 16:40 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 04:35:15PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 14:16 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 04:08:41PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > > > I don't see any equiv
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 04:35:15PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 14:16 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 04:08:41PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 13:37 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 14:16 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 04:08:41PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 13:37 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 11:43:30AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > > > What's wrong
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 04:08:41PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 13:37 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 11:43:30AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > > What's wrong with a non-vfio-specific flag that a driver can set, that
> > > > indicates t
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 13:37 -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 11:43:30AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > What's wrong with a non-vfio-specific flag that a driver can set, that
> > > indicates that the driver is willing to try to bind to any device on the
> > >
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 01:39:43PM -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 09:27:38PM +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > > What you're suggesting would let users specify that
> > > > a serial driver should handle a NIC hardware, no? That sounds much much
> > > > worse
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 01:37:35PM -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 11:43:30AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > What's wrong with a non-vfio-specific flag that a driver can set, that
> > > indicates that the driver is willing to try to bind to any device on the
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 09:27:38PM +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > What you're suggesting would let users specify that
> > > a serial driver should handle a NIC hardware, no? That sounds much much
> > > worse to me.
> >
> > The flag (and wildcard match, if applicable) would be set by the dri
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 11:43:30AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > What's wrong with a non-vfio-specific flag that a driver can set, that
> > indicates that the driver is willing to try to bind to any device on the
> > bus if explicitly requested via the existing sysfs bind mechanism?
> >
> It
xfoundation.org; linux-
> > > > > ker...@vger.kernel.org; a.mota...@virtualopensystems.com;
> > > > > ag...@suse.de;
> > > > > Yoder Stuart-B08248; Wood Scott-B07421; Sethi Varun-B16395; Bhushan
> > > > > Bharat-R65777; peter.mayd...@l
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 21:13 +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 03:04:15PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 11:43:30 -0700
> > Christoffer Dall wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 01:32:38PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > > > What's wrong with a non-vfio-s
ag...@suse.de;
> > > > Yoder Stuart-B08248; Wood Scott-B07421; Sethi Varun-B16395; Bhushan
> > > > Bharat-R65777; peter.mayd...@linaro.org; santosh.shu...@linaro.org;
> > > > k...@vger.kernel.org
> > > > Subject: Re: RFC: (re-)binding the VFIO platform d
Phillips; gre...@linuxfoundation.org; linux-
> > > > > ker...@vger.kernel.org; a.mota...@virtualopensystems.com;
> > > > > ag...@suse.de;
> > > > > Yoder Stuart-B08248; Wood Scott-B07421; Sethi Varun-B16395; Bhushan
> > > > > Bharat-
ag...@suse.de;
> > > > Yoder Stuart-B08248; Wood Scott-B07421; Sethi Varun-B16395; Bhushan
> > > > Bharat-R65777; peter.mayd...@linaro.org; santosh.shu...@linaro.org;
> > > > k...@vger.kernel.org
> > > > Subject: Re: RFC: (re-)binding the VFIO platform d
> Bharat-R65777; peter.mayd...@linaro.org; santosh.shu...@linaro.org;
> > > k...@vger.kernel.org
> > > Subject: Re: RFC: (re-)binding the VFIO platform driver to a platform
> > > device
> > >
> > > Wouldn't a sysfs file to add compatibility strin
nuxfoundation.org; linux-
> > ker...@vger.kernel.org; a.mota...@virtualopensystems.com; ag...@suse.de;
> > Yoder Stuart-B08248; Wood Scott-B07421; Sethi Varun-B16395; Bhushan
> > Bharat-R65777; peter.mayd...@linaro.org; santosh.shu...@linaro.org;
> > k...@vger.kernel.org
> &g
.@suse.de;
> Yoder Stuart-B08248; Wood Scott-B07421; Sethi Varun-B16395; Bhushan
> Bharat-R65777; peter.mayd...@linaro.org; santosh.shu...@linaro.org;
> k...@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: (re-)binding the VFIO platform driver to a platform
> device
>
> On Tue, Oct 01, 20
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 16:14 +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 08:35:56PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 02:53 +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 05:02:44PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:00:54 -0700
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 08:35:56PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 02:53 +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 05:02:44PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:00:54 -0700
> > > Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Oct 01, 201
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 02:53 +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 05:02:44PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:00:54 -0700
> > Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 01:38:31PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Santo
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 05:02:44PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:00:54 -0700
> Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 01:38:31PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Santosh and I are having a problem figuring out how to enable binding
> > > (and
On Tue, 2013-10-01 at 16:59 -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 14:15:38 -0500
> Scott Wood wrote:
>
> > I think the ideal interface would be if you could write the sysfs device
> > name into the vfio bind file (or some new file in the same directory),
> > and have it claim that devic
On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:00:54 -0700
Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 01:38:31PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Santosh and I are having a problem figuring out how to enable binding
> > (and re-binding) platform devices to a platform VFIO driver (see
> > Antonis' WIP:
On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 14:17:16 -0500
Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-01 at 14:15 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-10-01 at 13:38 -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Santosh and I are having a problem figuring out how to enable binding
> > > (and re-binding) platform device
On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 14:15:38 -0500
Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-01 at 13:38 -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Santosh and I are having a problem figuring out how to enable binding
> > (and re-binding) platform devices to a platform VFIO driver (see
> > Antonis' WIP: [1]) in an ups
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 01:38:31PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Santosh and I are having a problem figuring out how to enable binding
> (and re-binding) platform devices to a platform VFIO driver (see
> Antonis' WIP: [1]) in an upstream-acceptable manner.
>
> Binding platform drivers curr
On Tue, 2013-10-01 at 14:15 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-01 at 13:38 -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Santosh and I are having a problem figuring out how to enable binding
> > (and re-binding) platform devices to a platform VFIO driver (see
> > Antonis' WIP: [1]) in an upst
On Tue, 2013-10-01 at 13:38 -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Santosh and I are having a problem figuring out how to enable binding
> (and re-binding) platform devices to a platform VFIO driver (see
> Antonis' WIP: [1]) in an upstream-acceptable manner.
>
> Binding platform drivers currently d
Hi,
Santosh and I are having a problem figuring out how to enable binding
(and re-binding) platform devices to a platform VFIO driver (see
Antonis' WIP: [1]) in an upstream-acceptable manner.
Binding platform drivers currently depends on a string match in the
device node's compatible entry. On a
45 matches
Mail list logo
