Re: [virtio-comment] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-pci: implement VIRTIO_F_QUEUE_STATE

["Zhu, Lingshan" <lingshan.zhu@intel.com>]

On 9/12/2023 1:51 PM, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > From: Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@intel.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2023 9:19 AM
> >
> > On 9/11/2023 7:50 PM, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > > From: Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@intel.com>
> > > > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2023 3:03 PM By the way, do you see
> > > > anything we need to improve in this series?
> > > Admin commands for passthrough devices of [1] is comprehensive proposal
> > covering all the aspects.
> > > To me [1] is superset work that covers all needed functionality and downtime
> > aspects.
> > > I plan to improve [1] with v1 this week by extending device context and
> > addressing other review comments.
> > > [1]
> > > https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-comment/202309/msg00061.h
> > > tml
> > I am not sure, we have discussed a lot about the potential issues in the treads. I
> > guess we should resolve them first. E.g., nested use cases.
> You are using nesting use case as the _only_ use case and attempt to steer using that.
> Not right.
>
> If you want to discuss, then lets have both the use cases, attempt to converge and if we can its really good.
> If we cannot, both requirements should be handled differently.
Isn't nested a clear use case that should be supported?