Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] transport-pci: Introduce legacy registers access using AQ

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

On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 12:11:50PM -0400, Parav Pandit wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/10/2023 2:04 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 10:23:39AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > I thought so too originally. Unfortunately I now think that no, legacy is not
> > > > going to be a byproduct of transport virtqueue for modern -
> > > > it is different enough that it needs dedicated commands.
> > > 
> > > If you mean the transport virtqueue, I think some dedicated commands
> > > for legacy are needed. Then it would be a transport that supports
> > > transitional devices. It would be much better than having commands for
> > > a partial transport like this patch did.
> > 
> > OK I am beginning to get what you are saying.  So your criticism is
> > this: what if device supports vq transport for modern, and we want to
> > build a transitional device on top.  how will that look. yes?
> > A reasonable thing to include at least in the commit log. Parav?
> > 
> I am still trying to understand what is "vq transport for modern"?
> Do you mean transporting currently defined config space access over vq?
> If so, is this VQ belong to the guest or hypervisor?

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220826100034.200432-2-lingshan.zhu%40intel.com/t.mbox.gz

-- 
MST