Re: [virtio-comment] Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] Introduce device group

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Wed, May 18 2022, Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> wrote:

> Hi MST,
>
> On 5/15/2022 6:25 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 01:58:18AM +0300, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
>>> +\subsection{Device group}\label{sec:Introduction / Terminology / Device group}
>>> +
>>> +A device group includes one or more virtio devices.
>>> +Each virtio device has a unique virtio device id (vdev_id) within a device group. A valid vdev_id is a 64-bit field in the range of
>>> +0x0 - 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF0. Vdev_id 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF is a value that refers to all devices in a device group and isn't a valid vdev_id.
>>> +
>>> +For now, the supported device groups are:
>>> +\begin{enumerate}
>>> +\item Type 1 - A virtio PCI SR-IOV physical function (PF) and its PCI SR-IOV virtual functions (VFs). For this group type, the PF device has vdev_id that is equal to 0
>>> +and the VF devices have vdev_id's that are equal to their vf_number (according to the PCI SR-IOV specification).
>>> +\end{enumerate}
>>> +
>>>   \section{Structure Specifications}\label{sec:Structure Specifications}
>>
>> In context of virtualization type 1 already refers to a specific type
>> of hypervisor.
>>
>> I suggest simply "SR-IOV type" - this way users do not need to remember
>> special terminology.
>
> This is 12 lines addition commit with simple definition.
>
> I didn't mentioned hypervisors here.
>
> I will stick to your suggestion and use name instead of numbers 
> (although I don't understand how can a use that knows how to read spec 
> will be confused here), but I would like Jason and Cornelia to ack on 
> this during this review cycle.
>
> When we'll get 3 acks on this name - I'll update it for v6.

So, do you want to imply some kind of numbering? I don't like "Type 1",
either. If the type needs to be referenced in code, it should have a
#define or such; otherwise, "SR-IOV type" would be fine.