[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] [RFC PATCH] docs/interop: define STANDALONE protocol feature for vhost-user
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 03:36:01PM -0400, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 12:27:39PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 04:02:42PM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote: > > > > > > Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> writes: > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 01:36:00PM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote: > > > > > diff --git a/docs/interop/vhost-user.rst b/docs/interop/vhost-user.rst > > > > > index 5a070adbc1..85b1b1583a 100644 > > > > > --- a/docs/interop/vhost-user.rst > > > > > +++ b/docs/interop/vhost-user.rst > > > > > @@ -275,6 +275,21 @@ Inflight description > > > > > > > > > > :queue size: a 16-bit size of virtqueues > > > > > > > > > > +Backend specifications > > > > > +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > > + > > > > > ++-----------+-------------+------------+------------+ > > > > > +| device id | config size | min_vqs | max_vqs | > > > > > ++-----------+-------------+------------+------------+ > > > > > + > > > > > +:device id: a 32-bit value holding the VirtIO device ID > > > > > + > > > > > +:config size: a 32-bit value holding the config size (see ``VHOST_USER_GET_CONFIG``) > > > > > + > > > > > +:min_vqs: a 32-bit value holding the minimum number of vqs supported > > > > > > > > Why do we need the minimum? > > > > > > We need to know the minimum number because some devices have fixed VQs > > > that must be present. > > > > But does QEMU need to know this? > > > > Or is it okay that the driver will then fail in the guest if there > > are not the right number of queues? > > I don't understand why min_vqs is needed either. It's not the > front-end's job to ensure that the device will be used properly. A > spec-compliant driver will work with a spec-compliant device, so it's > not clear why the front-end needs this information. > > Stefan I think this really demonstrates why we should keep separate messages and not the "standalone" thing which seems to mean "bundle a bunch of mostly unrelated stuff in one message": this way each field is carefully documented. -- MST
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]