RE: [virtio-comment] [PATCH requirements 0/7] virtio net new features requirements

[Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>]

> From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2023 6:50 PM
> 
> thanks for write up! great start.
> 
> some things look a bit more like a specific design that you have in mind. we
> need to take a step back and include the actual requirement too. it's ok to list a
> design idea too (you call them examples here).
> 
> splitting different areas in separate files might be a good idea.
>
Yes, as it grows, will likely do it, when the design part takes shape and gets extended as section.
At present with 10 to 20 lines in a file is overhead.
 
> some things will require virtio core extensions.
> 
> I have a generic comment about limitations such as alignment physically
> contiguous etc. It's natural for hardware vendors to try and push complexity to
> software, but in the end this might just shift overhead to driver/TCP stack.
Mostly for sure not the TCP stack.
Some part may be to software.
Overall software cost might be same or probably slightly higher but can have overall system improvement.

> Please try to add motivation with each requirement.

> I pointed out some of such cases as "weirdly specific".
> 
Yes. I had the rationale section, but I dropped it in the initial version to add on need basis to cut out the obvious.
Will insert some of it in v1.