Re: [virtio-comment] RE: [PATCH] content: reserve virtio device ID for QingTian Box devices

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Dec 27 2021, "Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service Product Dept.)"	<longpeng2@huawei.com> wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst@redhat.com]
>> Sent: Monday, December 27, 2021 4:15 PM
>> To: Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service Product Dept.)
>> <longpeng2@huawei.com>
>> Cc: Gonglei (Arei) <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>;
>> virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] content: reserve virtio device ID for QingTian Box devices
>> 
>> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 02:49:25PM +0000, Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure
>> Service Product Dept.) wrote:
>> > Hi Michael,
>> >
>> > Is there anything else I need to do to reserve the device id?
>> 
>> OK, I see the issue was created. I think it makes sense to wait
>> until Jan 3 with the vote since lots of people are on
>> vacation.
>> 
>
> Ok, thanks.
>
>> Meanwhile - are there plans to add this device to the spec eventually?
>> Can you share a bit more of what it does?
>> 
>
> We want to carve out some resources (e.g. vcpu, mem, pci_dev) from the user's 
> VM and then use these resources to start a sandbox for the user. The usage 
> quite likes the software enclave which Nitro already supported, but we have 
> much wider usage, for example, running unikernel + app (e.g. OSV + Redis) in 
> the sandbox, it would provide much better performance than the traditional os.

Sounds interesting. One question: Should this virtio device only support
a specific hypervisor, or could it support various hypervisors in
theory? (Via different commands or parameters.) In case of the latter,
it might be better to reserve an ID for a "sandbox device" or so. If the
design is too closely tied to your hypervisor, I'd be fine with
reserving the ID as proposed.