Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [virtio-comment] [PATCH v3 1/1] virtio-ism: introduce new device virtio-ism

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 02:39:53PM +0200, Alexandra Winter wrote:
> 
> 
> On 24.03.23 05:03, Wen Gu wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 2023/3/23 22:46, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > 
> >> On Thu,  9 Feb 2023 11:30:56 +0800
> >> Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> >>
> 
> ...
> 
> > 
> >> To get back to the things proposed here: the cdid is IMHO
> >> a nice thing, and is functionally corresponding to the
> >> (S)EID. But it is 16 byte wide, and I have no idea how
> >> is it supposed to be used in the CLC handshake.
> >>
> > 
> > CLC handshake carry one SEID for all the SMC-D device. Considering
> > coexistence with ISM, I am not sure whether we can change or increase
> > the SEID.. cc Alexandra
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > Wen Gu
> 
> As mentioned by others, discussions are ongoing.
> It would be great, if we can agree on a way to use the existing CLC handshake
> for SMC-D via virtio-ism and ism-loopback.
> In that case SEID needs to be unique per hardware instance, cannot be increased and
> can only be changed for x86 in a non-colliding way.
> 
> An alternative would be to define new a SMC-D(?) protocol variant/version, where we
> are free to define new fields (e.g. UUIDs).
> 
> Alexandra

Problem with tying to hardware is that it is blocking
migration (which is a challenge with ism anyway, but still).


> > 
> >> If this is really supposed to work with SMC and not just take
> >> inspiration from it, I would like some insight from our
> >> SMC experts (they are already on copy).
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Halil
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org