On Sun, 28 May 2017 14:49:58 +0000, Mintz, Yuval wrote: > > pf->limit_vfs = nfp_rtsym_read_le(pf->cpp, "nfd_vf_cfg_max_vfs", > > &err); > > if (!err) > > - return; > > + return pci_sriov_set_totalvfs(pf->pdev, pf->limit_vfs); > > While you're at it, If you're going to enforce the limit at the PCI level, > shouldn't you retire 'limit_vfs' altogether?
I don't think so, unfortunately. Sometimes FW sets this value to 0, which means no VFs should be used, but the PCIe subsystem uses 0 as "driver limit not set" :( I will put that in the commit message. > BTW, under which conditions would you expect to find a difference > in the maximal number of VFs? It mostly comes down to how FW projects choose to partition PCIe-side resources on the NFP. Some project for which SR-IOV is not a priority may want to disable it completely. The NFP is very software-driven, including most of PCIe interactions, descriptor formats etc. It's really up to particular projects to shape how the card works.
