Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Add VIRTIO_RING_F_LARGE_INDIRECT_DESC

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Nov 29 2021, Christian Schoenebeck <qemu_oss@crudebyte.com> wrote:

> This is a follow-up of:
> https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-comment/202111/msg00059.html
>
> These two patches introduce a more fine graded control over the maximum
> length of an indirect descriptor table.
>
> Associated Github Task:
> https://github.com/oasis-tcs/virtio-spec/issues/122
>
> v1 -> v2:
>
>   * "active/pending message(s)" -> "vring slot(s)"
>     NOTE: I decided to use the term "vring slot(s)" over the previously
>     suggested term "buffer(s)" as I found tha latter too ambiguous in this
>     context. [patch 1]
>
>   * "... but does not oppose a limit to the actual bulk data size
>     being transmitted."
>     ->
>     " ... but does not oppose a limit to the actual bulk data size
>     being transmitted when indirect descriptors are used." [patch 1]
>
>   * Add common configuration field "queue_indirect_size" and make it
>     mandatory as of revision 3. [NEW patch 2]

Now you have me confused: 'revision' is a ccw transport concept, but you
only add support on the pci transport? It's fine to leave out ccw (and
mmio) for now, but you should not talk about revision 3...

>
> Christian Schoenebeck (2):
>   Add VIRTIO_RING_F_LARGE_INDIRECT_DESC
>   Add common configuration field "queue_indirect_size"
>
>  content.tex    | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  split-ring.tex |  7 ++++++-
>  2 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)