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

[Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>]

> From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2023 5:23 PM
> 
> 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.
> 
It follows the existing legacy interface section, you asked to not duplicate it.

> 
> > > > > 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.
> 
It is not used outside of the legacy interface.

The point is guest driver will follow certain config write/read pattern.
Hypervisor has no way to fail it.
So what do you expect hypervisor to do on undesired sequence?
Do you propose to correct it and send it to device?
And if so, the intention is building sane device for legacy interface? If that is the intention, sound fine.