Re: [virtio-comment] [PATCH V3 RESEND 1/4] Introduce virito transport virtqueue

[Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 5:19 PM Zhu, Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/9/2022 5:12 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 04:36:43PM +0800, Zhu, Lingshan wrote:
> >>>> +
> >>>> +A device that offers feature bit VIRTIO_F_TRANSPT_VQ and a transport virtqueue is a management device.
> >>>> +It processes the commands through the transport virtqueue commands.
> >>> I think we need to be verbose here, e.g what did those transport
> >>> virtqueue commands do? What's the relationship between management
> >>> device and managed device?
> >> I will add an overview of the transport virtqueue commands here, and a
> >> description of the relationship in the "managed device" section.
> > Transport is fine but management of devices is clearly something
> > nvidia's patches do. So I think it's best to reuse the concept of device
> > groups for this, from Max's patchset. Let's not replicate that work at
> > least. I promised Max to help a bit with wording so I'll soon send a
> > revision of his patchset, the generic part about device group
> > from which you should be able to reuse.
> Of course, it is possible to add the device groups in this series for sure.
>
> What I don't understand is: what kind of commands against a device
> group? Destroy all?
> And normally a parent device only support one kind of devices, like a
> SRIOV capable
> virtio-net PF only supports virtio-net VFs on it, and maybe there will
> not be
> a device support both SIOV and SRIOV, it is complex in the HW
> implementation.

For having backward compatibility? (E.g for platforms that don't support SIOV)

Thanks

>
> Thanks,
> Zhu Lingshan
>