From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <d.csapak@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 933938AEF1 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 10:39:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 80A722BE9D for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 10:39:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 10:39:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 88B5742ED8 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 10:39:07 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <287d3d9d-7a5e-f228-3685-dc0af245790b@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 10:39:06 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:104.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/104.0 Content-Language: en-US To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20220726065559.674547-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <c7f6c5bd-ce31-ef1b-6253-e01ada414a6f@groupe-cyllene.com> From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <c7f6c5bd-ce31-ef1b-6253-e01ada414a6f@groupe-cyllene.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.096 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH common/qemu-server/manager] improve vGPU (mdev) usage for NVIDIA X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2022 08:39:38 -0000 On 8/9/22 09:59, DERUMIER, Alexandre wrote: > Le 26/07/22 à 08:55, Dominik Csapak a écrit : >> so maybe someone can look at that and give some feedback? >> my idea there would be to allow multiple device mappings per node >> (instead of one only) and the qemu code would select one automatically > Hi Dominik, > > do you want to create some kind of pool of pci devices in your ""add cluster-wide hardware device mapping" patches series ? > > Maybe in hardwaremap, allow to define multiple pci address on same node ? > > Then, for mdev, look if a mdev already exist in 1 of the device. > If not, try to create the mdev if 1 device, if it's failing (max number of mdev reached), try to create mdev on the other device,... > > if not mdev, choose a pci device in the pool not yet detached from host. > yes i plan to do this in my next iteration of the mapping series (basically what you describe) my (rough) idea: have a list of pci paths in mapping (e.g. 01:00.0;01:00.4;...) (should be enough, i don't think grouping unrelated devices (different vendor/product) makes much sense?) * non mdev: qemu-server checks the pci reservations (which we already have) and takes the first not yet reserved path * mdev qemu-server iterates over the devices until it finds one with the given mdev type available if none is found, error out (relevant bug for this: https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3574)