From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [213.167.242.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2CC71E487 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2024 15:34:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722180894; cv=none; b=T4r30OJ4Fid7TICiBYjismF7x28aph7DMyp6YrdsWPtHlbZ4Frcup03Rt68TMpuU/ULCM0pBK/VnI2QmbnYaz7rjaOIPSaj20+C82Nmq3FmQ27SLbSJEXd01ax9QLQiq9SUoRS3aw5kQeX3mIBZt2zi2cO83hSqQEuQEGWJA3l0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722180894; c=relaxed/simple; bh=D1lUrAtb/CiSAh3bACZv4z+JPkzu0VurNf42xLUy0g8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=VTR4kj+GU3Ybo9RicO5ONlUF1QM3R9l79kIVpWMmPHc3BcZWdpGWXHNrZ4L+JkOXyve/Z4cBzhHpPTAoyk2Ow8nUvvhMQm8UUku9D9oZKxbGQ2gYvSZ6VhGy/PhoAV/SY4Ub2zvLTn57EozqzMwMT+eOiv7+S1GfXF7jDIEsYlw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b=F+zgkV2T; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="F+zgkV2T" Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (81-175-209-231.bb.dnainternet.fi [81.175.209.231]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 67C728DB; Sun, 28 Jul 2024 17:34:05 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1722180845; bh=D1lUrAtb/CiSAh3bACZv4z+JPkzu0VurNf42xLUy0g8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=F+zgkV2TJGybLZVK00CfOVcntfmornTt7n6ih4Jgb6n0qY+SwB8+dQ/ZnCQ3qmzQQ YskzX0cAPv45krsD/XsPRD07OEyVgcen2ONH8jkJDP+1Ty9l83QaWQOt1O8OsZsJRN J8GHeXut/JMsOEhAkqKgsCDF7mG0+zSXGCFUC1No= Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 18:34:32 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Greg KH Cc: Dan Williams , ksummit@lists.linux.dev, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jgg@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Device Passthrough Considered Harmful? Message-ID: <20240728153432.GE30973@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <668c67a324609_ed99294c0@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch> <20240726142731.GG28621@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <66a43c48cb6cc_200582942d@dwillia2-mobl3.amr.corp.intel.com.notmuch> <20240728111826.GA30973@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <2024072802-amendable-unwatched-e656@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2024072802-amendable-unwatched-e656@gregkh> On Sun, Jul 28, 2024 at 05:16:28PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Jul 28, 2024 at 02:18:26PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 05:16:08PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > > Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > I know this is a topic proposed for the maintainers summit, but given > > > > the number of people who seem to have an opinion and be interested in > > > > dicussing it, would a session at LPC be a better candidate ? I don't > > > > expect the maintainer summit to invite all relevant experts from all > > > > subsystems, that would likely overflow the room. > > > > > > > > The downside of an LPC session is that it could easily turn into a > > > > heated stage fight, and there are probably also quite a few arguments > > > > that can't really be made in the open :-S > > > > > > A separate LPC session for a subsystem or set of subsystems to explore > > > local passthrough policy makes sense, but that is not the primary > > > motivation for also requesting a Maintainer Summit topic slot. The > > > primary motivation is discussing the provenance and navigation of > > > cross-subsystem NAKs especially in an environment where the lines > > > between net, mem, and storage are increasingly blurry at the device > > > level. > > > > Would there be enough space at the maintainers' summit for all the > > relevant people to join the discussion ? > > Who exactly would you consider the "relevant people" here? It's been a > wide-ranging conversation/thread :) I'd say the maintainers of the related subsystems/drivers, or the relevant open-source stacks, as well as the people who are pushing for a change, and overall the main stakeholders who took part in the discussions so far. I don't think it would be very nice to discuss this topic and make a decision behind closed doors while excluding some of those people from the process. I have opinions on the overall topic, but mostly related to cameras, so I wouldn't consider myself as relevant when it comes to net/mem/storage, mlx5 or fwctl in particular. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart