Re: [virtio-comment] [PATCH] virtio-vsock: add max payload size config field

[Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 05:27:28PM +0300, Laura Loghin wrote:
> On 6/15/22 17:11, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 04:49:31PM +0300, Laura Loghin wrote:
> > > @@ -57,6 +62,35 @@ \subsection{Device configuration layout}\label{sec:Device Types / Socket Device
> > >   \hline
> > >   \end{tabular}
> > > +The following driver-read-only field, \field{data_max_size} only exists if
> > > +VIRTIO_VSOCK_F_SIZE_MAX is set. This field specifies the maximum packet payload
> > > +size for the driver to use.
> > This wording can be misinterpreted but can be kept for now. This wording
> > should be updated when the next field is added in the future, indicating
> > that the field is only *used* when VIRTIO_VSOCK_F_SIZE_MAX has been
> > negotiated. Further fields will be located after data_max_size so the
> > field certainly *exists* even when VIRTIO_VSOCK_F_SIZE_MAX is not set.
> > 
> > If someone misinterprets this they might think the config struct layout
> > depends on the combination of negotiated feature bits. That's not the
> > case, the layout is always the same. The size of the struct depends on
> > the features offered by the device.
> > 
> > Similar wording is used elsewhere in the spec, so we may want to clarify
> > it for the entire spec.
> > 
> > Stefan
> 
> Yes, I agree with you. In fact when I added this section I had a look at
> the corresponding ones from other devices, and got confused by the wording.
> My understanding actually was that the field won't exist, but indeed I
> found it pretty weird, so it would be great if we can update all the spec
> sections that are propagating this misinterpretation. For now, I will
> update the section in this patch.

Thanks!

Stefan

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature