Re: [virtio-dev] [PATCH 1/1] Allow "Vendor Specific" extension to virtio PCI capabilities.

[Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>]

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 08:48:58AM -0500, Venu Busireddy wrote:
> On 2018-05-22 11:03:37 +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 04:43:36PM -0500, Venu Busireddy wrote:
> > > On 2018-05-18 17:06:23 +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 09:06:04AM -0400, Venu Busireddy wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Can you describe a use case where vendor-specific extensions make sense
> > > > as opposed to extending the VIRTIO specification?
> > > 
> > > Sometimes, qemu may need to group certain devices together. In our
> > > problem scenario, qemu needed to tell the driver which virtio device is a
> > > fallback device for a given vfio-pci device. If the virtio device's PCI
> > > capabilities are extended, the new capability could be used to store a
> > > unique ID (say, the bus:device:function) that identifies the vfio-pci
> > > device. The driver can use that information when needed to pair the
> > > virtio device with the vfio-pci device.
> > 
> > This feature seems generic and could be in the VIRTIO spec proper.  What
> > is vendor-specific about it?
> > 
> > > Extending the VIRTIO specification is also a good alternative, but
> > > every time the vendor needs something new, the specification needs to
> > > be changed again. A generic "vendor specific" mechanism alleviates that.
> > 
> > If you plan to push Linux code changes upstream to implement this
> > feature then a vendor-specific extension is inappropriate and you should
> > extend the VIRTIO spec.
> 
> I will redo the patch to extend the virtio specification.
> 
> Since the new patch will be conceptually different, shall I create a
> new thread, or should I post it as v2?

Please post a new patch.  Thanks!

Stefan

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature