[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] Add virtio Admin virtqueue
On 2/7/2022 1:51 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Mon, Feb 07 2022, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 12:14:33PM +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote:On 2/3/2022 3:09 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:On Thu, Feb 03 2022, Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> wrote:+commands to manipulate various features of the device and/or to manipulate +various features, if possible, of another device within the same group (e.g. PCI VFsMaybe add "Which devices are actually considered a group is transport specific." ?Not sure we want to restrict ourselves for that.do restrict this please, if we want to extend the scope we can always do that down the road.I'm also not sure how grouping can _not_ be transport specific... the PF/VF example is obviously a pci thing; for ccw, in a non-virtio context, there's sometimes the concept of some subchannels/devices being grouped together with no clear hierarchy, and for mmio, I don't really have an idea how "grouping" might work there.
Yes today it's transport specific.But if one day there will be a definition for virtio fabric (over TCP/RDMA) it might not be true.
+When VIRTIO_F_ADMIN_VQ is negotiated with the device, driver will send all admin commands +through the admin virtqueue.That sounds a bit like the driver might use an alternative interface for the admin commands as well? What aboutYes if there will be an alternative for AQ and this feature bit will not be negotiated so the driver will use a different channel. This was explicitly discussed in previous versions. What is the issue with this assumption ?it's not an issue down the road but we want to be clear that right now that is the only way, to make sure reader does not waste time looking for more ways in the spec. maybe just say so.Yes, we should be explicit that admin commands are independent of the conduit they are using, and that currently the only conduit is the admin vq. Someone reading the spec does not know about previous discussions on the mailing list. Maybe reorder this? First have a section where the admin commands are defined, and then have a section that lists the different channels admin commands can use, where the admin vq is the only one currently supported?
I'll reorder it for V4.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]