[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [virtio-dev] RE: [PATCH v10] virtio-net: support the virtqueue coalescing moderation
> From: virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org <virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org> On > Behalf Of Heng Qi > Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 10:27 PM > > > I remember we discussed that instead of mentioning each individual field, > better to describe the whole structure being read-only or write-only. > > Consider the following scenarios: > 1. A read-only field of the structure virtio_net_ctrl_coal is extended for > CTRL_NOTF_COAL_RX/TX_SET to get some extra information A set command cannot extend the struct virtio_net_ctrl_coal, particularly for read-only and partially for write-only. This would mean that for the tiny number of bytes, an additional dma descriptor is to be allocated with read/write-only permissions. It would be inefficient for the driver to do so for the SET command to have vqn as write-only, reserved as read-only, rest fields as write-only dma attributes. As I think more, I think the whole set command fields should be read-only for device. Better to describe it this way instead of splitting individual fields. This way driver can just do a single DMA allocation with read-only attributes for set cmd. Get command doesnât have any choice today the way CVQ is structured to it lives with the limitation. > > Looks good, however you have well covered in the device normative > statements. > > So possibly it can be removed from here. > > I tend to keep this, as we have done in the past, we can have normative > descriptions and the corresponding non-normative descriptions. > Ok. but please revisit if the description can be simpler text than the normative lines.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]