On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 12:14:13PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
On 2021/2/16 5:44 下午, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
This new callback is used to get the size of the configuration space
of vDPA devices.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarz...@redhat.com>
---
include/linux/vdpa.h | 4 ++++
drivers/vdpa/ifcvf/ifcvf_main.c | 6 ++++++
drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c | 6 ++++++
drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.c | 9 +++++++++
4 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/linux/vdpa.h b/include/linux/vdpa.h
index 4ab5494503a8..fddf42b17573 100644
--- a/include/linux/vdpa.h
+++ b/include/linux/vdpa.h
@@ -150,6 +150,9 @@ struct vdpa_iova_range {
* @set_status: Set the device status
* @vdev: vdpa device
* @status: virtio device status
+ * @get_config_size: Get the size of the configuration space
+ * @vdev: vdpa device
+ * Returns size_t: configuration size
Rethink about this, how much we could gain by introducing a dedicated
ops here? E.g would it be simpler if we simply introduce a
max_config_size to vdpa device?
Mainly because in this way we don't have to add new parameters to the
vdpa_alloc_device() function.
We do the same for example for 'get_device_id', 'get_vendor_id',
'get_vq_num_max'. All of these are usually static, but we have ops.
I think because it's easier to extend.
I don't know if it's worth adding a new structure for these static
values at this point, like 'struct vdpa_config_params'.
Thanks,
Stefano
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
