On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:23:17AM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: > > On 9/27/2018 9:17 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:17:37AM +0300, Sameeh Jubran wrote: > > > What do you think about the following alternative implementation which > > > uses cross id validation. > > > > > > -device > > > virtio-net,standby=<device_id_of_vfio_device>,id=<device_id_of_virtio_net_device> > > > -vfio > > > #address,id=<device_id_of_vfio_device>,primary=<device_id_of_virtio_net_device> > > virtio is a standby device, isn't it? > > > > Besides that I don't see issues with this API. > > Yes. I think 'standby' and 'primary' are reversed in the above suggestion. > This should work. > > -device > virtio-net,primary=<device_id_of_vfio_device>,id=<device_id_of_virtio_net_device> > -vfio > #address,id=<device_id_of_vfio_device>,standby=<device_id_of_virtio_net_device> > > It should be OK to have virtio-net in standby mode without an associated vfio > primary device, > but a vfio primary device should not allowed without a virtio-net standby > device. > > Will it be possible to remove vfio device when virtio_net driver is unloaded > in the VM? > > Thanks > Sridhar > >
We can request removal, yes. -- MST --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
