> -----Original Message----- > From: Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.bura...@intel.com> > Sent: Monday, November 1, 2021 9:57 PM > To: Xia, Chenbo <chenbo....@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] vfio: drop fallback Linux > implementation > > On 01-Nov-21 6:27 AM, Xia, Chenbo wrote: > > Hi Anatoly, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: dev <dev-boun...@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Anatoly Burakov > >> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 10:15 PM > >> To: dev@dpdk.org > >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] vfio: drop fallback Linux implementation > >> > >> Currently, VFIO support for Linux is compiled unconditionally, and > >> supported kernel versions start with 4.4, so VFIO is assumed to always > >> be enabled. There is no way of disabling VFIO support at compile time > >> anyway, so just drop the "VFIO not available" fallback code altogether. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.bura...@intel.com> > >> --- > >> lib/eal/linux/eal_vfio.c | 110 --------------------------------------- > >> 1 file changed, 110 deletions(-) > >> > > > > If we make the 'kernel >= 4.4' assumption, should other 'VFIO_PRESENT' in > eal > > and drivers be deleted as well? It seems strange to me as eal_vfio already > > assumes it supports vfio but drivers and other eal components still have the > > check. > > We still need those checks because those drivers are also compiled on > FreeBSD etc. - so we're not removing the VFIO check, we're just removing > the fallback implementation for Linux that was, at one point, possible, > but now isn't.
Make sense to me. Acked-by: Chenbo Xia <chenbo....@intel.com> > > > > > Thanks, > > Chenbo > > > > > -- > Thanks, > Anatoly
