Is the expected behavior with vdpa_sim and mlx.

Signed-off-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@redhat.com>
---
 drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c b/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c
index 151c6d133e76..5f0032df43b8 100644
--- a/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c
+++ b/drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c
@@ -445,6 +445,9 @@ static __poll_t vduse_dev_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
 	return mask;
 }
 
+static int vduse_set_group_asid(struct vdpa_device *vdpa, unsigned int group,
+				unsigned int asid);
+
 static void vduse_dev_reset(struct vduse_dev *dev)
 {
 	int i;
@@ -457,6 +460,9 @@ static void vduse_dev_reset(struct vduse_dev *dev)
 			vduse_domain_reset_bounce_map(domain);
 	}
 
+	for (i = 0; i < dev->ngroups; i++)
+		vduse_set_group_asid(&dev->vdev->vdpa, i, 0);
+
 	down_write(&dev->rwsem);
 
 	dev->status = 0;
-- 
2.49.0

On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 7:50 PM Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Is the expected behavior with vdpa_sim and mlx.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@redhat.com>
> ---
>  drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>

Should we squash this into patch 3?

Thanks

On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 2:33 AM Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 7:50 PM Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Is the expected behavior with vdpa_sim and mlx.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c | 6 ++++++
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >
>
> Should we squash this into patch 3?
>

I agree, I'll do it for the next series. Thanks!