Re: [virtio] Re: [virtio-comment] *-over-virtio

[Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>]

On 08/05/2013 11:48 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com> writes:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We seem to have a family of several devices that are rather simple on the virtio level. Some
> > identifying features include:
> >
> >    * No real usage of the configuration space
> >    * No device features
> >    * No control vqs
> >    * Usually one, but possibly 2 vqs used for straightforward message passing outside the virtio
> > scope.
> >
> > The use case is simple: use virtio as a simple transport for protocol specific messages, this
> > can pretty much go over any other transport exactly the same way.
> >
> > Would it make sense to move their actual definition out of the spec and just reserve device
> > IDs for them there?
>
> Do we have any in the current spec?  It's certainly easy to reserve IDs
> for things which aren't in the spec.

virtio-rng and virtio-9p are good examples of that. Maybe virtio-rpmsg too, depends on how
you stretch that description above.


Thanks,
Sasha