[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [virtio-comment] Re: [PATCH v1 3/8] device-context: Define the device context fields for device migration
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 6:14âPM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 05:42:29PM +0800, Zhu, Lingshan wrote: > > > Your answer is not relevant to this discussion at all. > > > Why? > > > Because we were discussing the schemes where registers are not used. > > > One example of that was IMS. It does not matter MSI or MSIX. > > > As explained in Intel's commit message, the key to focus for IMS is "queue memory" not some hw register like MSI or MSI-X. > > you know the device always need to know a address and the data to send a > > MSI, right? > > So if virtio is to use IMS then we'll need to add interfaces to program > IMS, I think. As part of that patch - it's reasonable to assume - we will > also need to add a way to retrieve IMS so it can be migrated. > > However, what this example demonstrates is that the approach taken > by this proposal to migrate control path structures - namely, by > defining a structure used just for migration - means that we will > need to come up with a migration interface each time. > And that is unfortunate. > > Compare to the trap and emulate approach for config space and we don't > need a new interface, we just make each field R/W. > So I feel this is something to think about, and address. > Ideas? Something like we've done for transportq in the past? (by just adding the get commands): https://lore.kernel.org/all/29533940-0345-4a84-fcc7-f42d914dc28d@intel.com/T/#mbfe209b96e1dda88ed7aae04d25b12026a7b5364 Thanks > > -- > MST >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]