Re: [PATCH 1/5] Add virtio Admin Virtqueue specification

[Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com>]

On 1/19/2022 5:38 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 04:47:10PM +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
> > I agree, I don't see why it's not possible to use a different command opcode
> > for vf interrupt configuration and sf interrupt configuration.
> >
> > We're not short in opcodes and it's very elegant and extendable IMO.
> >
> > I think the order should be:
> >
> > 1. add adminq to virtio spec with one simple example (say MSIX config for
> > VFs)
> >
> > 2. in parallel submission for admin commands: S-IOV support, num VQs config,
> > feature bits config and more...
> Up to you for sure but didn't you guys try this already?  I think there
> are concerns such as how this will be extended to support subfunctions.
> I can't say what do you want to do about that in v2, ignoring them
> completely is probably not a good way to get more support in the TC.
> Just my two cents, hope this helps.

I think that Parav demonstrated the flexibility and extendability of 
this interface.

And also I think you mentioned that you don't expect us to instrument 
this solution to this series.

During this discussion we agreed that using admin commands one can 
manage SRIOV and SIOV, didn't we ?