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

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

On 10/30/2023 7:27 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 07:04:38AM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > 1. It breaks the future TDISP model
> I really think brinding in TDISP muddies the waters a lot and
> should be avoided. We simply won't know until someone does the
> legwork and proposed the necessary spec extensions.
> In particular current legacy access commands are I thn
>
>
> > 2. Without hypervisor getting involved, all the member device MMIO space is accessible which follows the efficiency and equivalency principle of Jason listed paper
> >
> > I hope you are not implying to trap+emulate virtio interfaces (which is not listed in the pci-spec) in hypervisor for member passthrough devices.
> I feel this discussion will keep meandering because the terminology is
> vague. There's no single thing that is called "passthrough" -
> vendors just build what is expedient with current hardware and
> software. Nvidia has a bunch of people working on vfio so they
> call that passthrough, Red Hat has people working on VDPA and
> they call that passthrough, etc.
>
>
> Before I mute this discussion for good, does anyone here have any
> feeling progress is made? What kind of progress?
I agree, please no future discussions of passthrough and TDISP. Really 
not helpful.

I am really feel wasting time here explaining what is pass-through, the 
use-case and
why TDISP is not related here. What is the point talking about something 
not present right now?

Just to keep the discussion open????

Please!!!!
>