Re: [PATCH 0/16 v6] PCI: Linux kernel SR-IOV support

From: Yu Zhao
Date: Fri Nov 07 2008 - 10:21:08 EST


While we are arguing what the software model the SR-IOV should be, let me ask two simple questions first:

1, What does the SR-IOV looks like?
2, Why do we need to support it?

I'm sure people have different understandings from their own view points. No one is wrong, but, please don't make thing complicated and don't ignore user requirements.

PCI SIG and hardware vendors create such thing intending to make hardware resource in one PCI device be shared from different software instances -- I guess all of us agree with this. No doubt PF is real function in the PCI device, but VF is different? No, it also has its own Bus, Device and Function numbers, and PCI configuration space and Memory Space (MMIO). To be more detailed, it can response to and initiate PCI Transaction Layer Protocol packets, which means it can do everything a PF can in PCI level. From these obvious behaviors, we can conclude PCI SIG model VF as a normal PCI device function, even it's not standalone.

As you know the Linux kernel is the base of various virtual machine monitors such as KVM, Xen, OpenVZ and VServer. We need SR-IOV support in the kernel because mostly it helps high-end users (IT departments, HPC, etc.) to share limited hardware resources among hundreds or even thousands virtual machines and hence reduce the cost. How can we make these virtual machine monitors utilize the advantage of SR-IOV without spending too much effort meanwhile remaining architectural correctness? I believe making VF represent as much closer as a normal PCI device (struct pci_dev) is the best way in current situation, because this is not only what the hardware designers expect us to do but also the usage model that KVM, Xen and other VMMs have already supported.

I agree that API in the SR-IOV pacth is arguable and the concerns such as lack of PF driver, etc. are also valid. But I personally think these stuff are not essential problems to me and other SR-IOV driver developers. People can refine things but don't want to recreate things in another totally different way especially that way doesn't bring them obvious benefits.

As I can see that we are now reaching a point that a decision must be made, I know this is such difficult thing in an open and free community but fortunately we have a lot of talented and experienced people here. So let's make it happen, and keep our loyal users happy!

Thanks,
Yu
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/