Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 12, 2021. It is now read-only.

PCI paths handling is confusing in the code #3002

Closed
dgibson opened this issue Oct 8, 2020 · 0 comments · Fixed by #3003
Closed

PCI paths handling is confusing in the code #3002

dgibson opened this issue Oct 8, 2020 · 0 comments · Fixed by #3003
Assignees
Labels
bug Incorrect behaviour needs-forward-port Changes need to be applied to a newer branch / repository needs-review Needs to be assessed by the team. no-backport-needed Changed do not need to be applied to an older branch / repository

Comments

@dgibson
Copy link
Contributor

dgibson commented Oct 8, 2020

This is a code clarity and extensibility issue, rather than a problem in behaviour.

Description of problem

A number of places in the runtime code use values described as a "PCI address" but which are not actuall in PCI address format (DDDD:BB:DD.F). Rather they are "PCI paths" - that is a description of the location of a device based on its slot number and the slot number of all the bridges traversed to reach it.

For now, the PCI paths we generate always have exactly two elements (one bridge + the device itself), but we will want to use other cases in future. kata-containers/agent#854 is tracking making that generalization on the agent side.

Expected result

PCI paths are handled and named consistently distinct from PCI addresses in the normal format.

Actual result

"PCI address" in the code frequently refers to (a limited form of) PCI paths.

Further information

See also kata-containers/agent#854 and kata-containers/agent#855

@dgibson dgibson added bug Incorrect behaviour needs-review Needs to be assessed by the team. needs-forward-port Changes need to be applied to a newer branch / repository no-backport-needed Changed do not need to be applied to an older branch / repository labels Oct 8, 2020
@dgibson dgibson self-assigned this Oct 8, 2020
@dgibson dgibson linked a pull request Oct 16, 2020 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
bug Incorrect behaviour needs-forward-port Changes need to be applied to a newer branch / repository needs-review Needs to be assessed by the team. no-backport-needed Changed do not need to be applied to an older branch / repository
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant