Re: [virtio-comment] Re: [PATCH v1 3/8] device-context: Define the device context fields for device migration

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

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 09:01:10AM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > 7. Additionally, a nested virtualization should be done by truly nesting the
> > device at right abstraction point of owner-member relationship.
> > > This follows two principles of (a) efficiency and (b) equivalency of what Jason
> > paper pointed.
> > > And we ask for nested VF extension we will get our guidance from PCI-SIG, of
> > why it should be done if it is matching with rest of the ecosystem components
> > that support/donât support the nesting.
> > It they are true, shall we refactor virtio-pci common cfg functionalities to use
> > admin vq?
> For non-backward compatible SIOV device of the future, yes, virtio-pci common config (non init registers) should be moved to a vq, located on the member device directly.

I doubt it can be a vq though. This is why I'm asking for a simple way
to send admin commands to device. Then non-backward compatible SIOV can
be hopefully built on top of that.