On Thu, Oct 02, 2025 at 02:18:36PM +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote: > On Thu Oct 2, 2025 at 2:11 PM CEST, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 07:00:09PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote: > >> Add a "supports_vf" flag to struct pci_driver to let drivers declare > >> Virtual Function (VF) support. If a driver does not support VFs, then > >> the PCI driver core will not probe() any VFs for that driver's devices. > >> > >> On the Rust side, add a const "SUPPORTS_VF" Driver trait, defaulting to > >> false: drivers must explicitly opt into VF support. > > > > As I said in the other thread - please no. > > > > Linux drivers are expected to run on their VFs. > > The consequence would be that drivers for HW that can export VFs would need to > be rejected upstream if they only support the PF, but no VFs. IMHO, that's an > unreasonable requirement.
Not rejected, they just need to open code a simple isvf check and fail during probe if they really have a (hopefully temporary) problem. This not really a realistic case. Linux running in the VM *should* have drivers that operate the VF, and those existing drivers *should* work in the PF context. Drivers that work in VM but not in a host should not be encouraged!! AFAICT this is even true for novacore, the driver should "work" but the VF won't be provisioned today so it should fail startup in some way. eg "no vram" or something like that. > > This temporary > > weirdness of novacore should not be elevated to a core behavior that > > people will misuse. > > It's not just nova-core, please see [1]. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/ I responded there, I don't think the reasons those were added to ICE and then cargo-culted are very good, not good enough to justify adding it to the core code. Jason
