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

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

On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 09:19:02PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> 
> > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2023 4:58 PM
> 
> > > > Let me give you an example. I feel that device specific config
> > > > should allow arbitrary length accesses so that e.g.
> > > > mac can be read and written atomically.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, this is not the case for common config.
> > > >
> > > Why is this not the case with common config?
> > > Spec snippet: "When using the legacy interface the driver MAY access
> > > the device-specific configuration region using any width accesses"
> > 
> > I mean, what you said above exactly?
> > device-specific configuration excludes common config.
> > 
> > 
> So, what prevents the device to fail AQ command with the error code when alignment/width/size is not right?

Nothing but you then need to specify what is and what isn't right.


> > > > I feel we do not need to allow e.g. access to both common config and
> > > > device specific one in a single operation, that is just messy.
> > > It is just an offset and value.
> > > What part bothers you?
> > 
> > E.g. that it can cross the coundary between common and device config.
> > 
> This is the legacy transport.
> 
> > Look we didn't build modern because we wanted to make work, we did because
> > legacy is broken.  So either let legacy die already or let's build a sane interface
> > to emulate it please.
> Almost everyone building virtio device would prefer for legacy to die.
> I am still trying to understand that why bisecting register definition of legacy makes it sane.

Because legacy common config is very evil, do not copy it.
Legacy device config is only bad in minor tolerable ways.

> Device behaves based on the register offset, is fine for the legacy transport, guest driver will make the register accesses anyway it prefers.