Re: [PATCH v6 6/8] virtio: add vfio api to rd/wr ioport space
From: Yuanhan Liu <hidden>
Date: 2016-02-01 12:47:25
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:51:55PM +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
For vfio case - Use pread/pwrite api to access virtio ioport space. Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <redacted> Signed-off-by: Rizwan Ansari <redacted> Signed-off-by: Rakesh Krishnamurthy <redacted> --- v5-->v6: - renamed inport_in/out to vfio_in/out - Renamed file from virtio_vfio_rw.h to virtio_vfio_io.h drivers/net/virtio/virtio_vfio_io.h | 104 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 104 insertions(+) create mode 100644 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_vfio_io.hdiff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_vfio_io.h b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_vfio_io.h new file mode 100644 index 0000000..218d4ed --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_vfio_io.h
...
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -0,0 +1,104 @@ +#ifndef _VIRTIO_VFIO_IO_H_ +#define _VIRTIO_VFIO_IO_H_ + +#include "virtio_logs.h" +#if defined(RTE_EAL_VFIO) && defined(RTE_LIBRTE_EAL_LINUXAPP)
Won't it cause build failure if above "#if ..." is false, as virtio_read/write_reg_x() reference them unconditionally? BTW, why above check is needed? We have rte_eal_pci_read/write_bar() implementation with both VFIO and BSD, don't we?
+#endif /* _VIRTIO_VFIO_RW_H_ */
^^^^ You forgot to do rename here. BTW, I didn't follow the noIOMMU discussion; how did it end? Do we still need that? Is this patch a full story to enable virtio on ARM? --yliu