[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 12/12] vfio/pci: Report dev_id in VFIO_DEVICE_GET_PCI_HOT_RESET_INFO

[Liu, Yi L]

> From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson at redhat.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 10:09 PM
[...]
> > > Whereas dev-id < 0
> > > (== -1) is an affected device which prevents hot-reset, ex. an un-owned
> > > device, device configured within a different iommufd_ctx, or device
> > > opened outside of the vfio cdev API."  Is that about right?  Thanks,
> >
> > Do you mean to have separate err-code for the three possibilities? As
> > the devid is generated by iommufd and it is u32. I'm not sure if we can
> > have such err-code definition without reserving some ids in iommufd.
> 
> Yes, if we're going to report the full dev-set, I think we need at
> least two unique error codes or else the user has no way to determine
> the subset of invalid dev-ids which block the reset.  I think Jason is
> proposing the set of valid dev-ids are >0, a dev-id of zero indicates
> some form of non-blocking, while <0 (or maybe specifically -1)
> indicates a blocking device.  I was trying to get consensus on a formal
> definition of each of those error codes in my previous reply.  Thanks,

Seems like RESETTABLE flag is not needed if we report -1 for the devices
that block hotreset. Userspace can deduce if the calling device is resettable
or not by checking if there is any -1 in the affected device list.

Regards,
Yi Liu