On 1/21/21 3:46 PM, Pierre Morel wrote:
>
>
> On 1/21/21 2:37 PM, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/21 1:30 PM, Pierre Morel wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> Just wanted to say that we've had a very similar discussion with
>>>> Cornelia end of last year and came to the conclusion that explicitly
>>>> matching the PFT is likely the safest bet:
>>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/12/22/479
>>>
>>> What I see there is a discussion on the relation between relaxed access and
>>> MIO without explaining to Connie that we have in the kernel the possibility
>>> to know if a device support MIO or not independently of it supports the
>>> relaxed access.
>>>
>>> The all point here is about taking decisions for the right reasons.
>>>
>>> We have the possibility to take the decision based on functionalities and
>>> not on a specific PCI function.
>>
>> Yes but that goes both ways the functionality of the region has to match
>> that of the device and at least in it's current state the regions
>> functionality
>> matches only ISM in a way that is so specific that it is very unlikely to
>> match anything
>> else. For example it can't support a PCI device that requires non-MIO but
>> also MSI-X. In its current form it doesn't even support PCI Store only PCI
>> Store
>> Block, we had that in an earlier version and it's trivial but then we get
>> the MSI-X
>> problem.
>
>
> What does that change if we take one or the other solution considering the
> checking of MIO/MSIX/relax versus PFT?
If it's !MIO && !MSIX && relax_align I'm fine with that check but
then we should also add PCISTG to the region.
