[PATCH V10 6/6] docs: sample driver to demonstrate how to implement virtio-mdev framework

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 08:47:06PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2019/11/7 下午8:43, Jason Wang wrote:
> > 
> > On 2019/11/7 下午7:21, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 06:18:45PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > On 2019/11/7 下午5:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 09:35:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > > > This sample driver creates mdev device that simulate
> > > > > > virtio net device
> > > > > > over virtio mdev transport. The device is implemented through vringh
> > > > > > and workqueue. A device specific dma ops is to make sure HVA is used
> > > > > > directly as the IOVA. This should be sufficient for kernel virtio
> > > > > > driver to work.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Only 'virtio' type is supported right now. I plan to add 'vhost' type
> > > > > > on top which requires some virtual IOMMU implemented in this sample
> > > > > > driver.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Acked-by: Cornelia Huck<cohuck at redhat.com>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang<jasowang at redhat.com>
> > > > > I'd prefer it that we call this something else, e.g.
> > > > > mvnet-loopback. Just so people don't expect a fully
> > > > > functional device somehow. Can be renamed when applying?
> > > > Actually, I plan to extend it as another standard network interface for
> > > > kernel. It could be either a standalone pseudo device or a stack
> > > > device.
> > > > Does this sounds good to you?
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks
> > > That's a big change in an interface so it's a good reason
> > > to rename the driver at that point right?
> > > Oherwise users of an old kernel would expect a stacked driver
> > > and get a loopback instead.
> > > 
> > > Or did I miss something?
> > 
> > 
> > My understanding is that it was a sample driver in /doc. It should not
> > be used in production environment. Otherwise we need to move it to
> > driver/virtio.
> > 
> > But if you insist, I can post a V11.
> > 
> > Thanks
> 
> 
> Or maybe it's better to rename the type of current mdev from 'virtio' to
> 'virtio-loopback'. Then we can add more types in the future.
> 
> Thanks
> 

Maybe but is virtio actually a loopback somehow? I thought we
can bind a regular virtio device there, no?

-- 
MST