Re: [PATCH v8 8/9] admin: command list discovery

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Nov 23 2022, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:51:31AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 22 2022, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 04:25:23PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Nov 20 2022, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >> > +When \field{status} is VIRTIO_ADMIN_STATUS_EINVAL,
>> >> > +the following table describes possible \field{status_qialifier} values:
>> >> > +\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}
>> >> > +\hline
>> >> > +Status & Name & Description \\
>> >> > +\hline \hline
>> >> > +00h   & VIRTIO_ADMIN_STATUS_Q_INVALID_COMMAND   & command error: no additional information  \\
>> >> 
>> >> Either 0x00, or decimal (which one is better?)
>> >
>> > I think I prefer 0x here. And maybe I will add status values in both hex
>> > and decimal (I used decimal to be consistent with linux headers but
>> > fundamentally what we use most of the time is hex).
>> 
>> Ok.
>> 
>> >
>> >> > +\hline
>> >> > +01h   & VIRTIO_ADMIN_STATUS_Q_INVALID_OPCODE    & unsupported or invalid \field{opcode}  \\
>> >> > +\hline
>> >> > +02h   & VIRTIO_ADMIN_STATUS_Q_INVALID_FIELD    & unsupported or invalid field within \field{command_specific_data}  \\
>> >> > +\hline
>> >> > +03h   & VIRTIO_ADMIN_STATUS_Q_INVALID_GROUP    & unsupported or invalid \field{group_type} was set  \\
>> >> 
>> >> s/was set//
>> >> 
>> >> > +\hline
>> >> > +04h   & VIRTIO_ADMIN_STATUS_Q_INVALID_MEM    & unsupported or invalid \field{group_member_id} was set  \\
>> >> 
>> >> s/was set//
>> >> 
>> >> > +\hline
>> >> > +other   & -    & group administration command error  \\
>> >> 
>> >> Again the question whether this is something that can be defined per
>> >> group type.
>> >
>> > probably - above ones are generic, let's see if we need specific ones.
>> > if yes will be easy to add.
>> 
>> I think we want to distinguish between "reserved" (not defined yet, may
>> get a meaning later on) and "group type specific" (a group type may use
>> it, don't reuse for generic stuff). If we need group type specific
>> errors (and don't want a free-for-all), we could go with eg.
>> 
>> 0x05 & VIRTIO_ADMIN_STATUS_Q_GROUP_ERR_0 & group type specific error \\
>> 
>> or so? Do we see any need for that yet?
>
> Not yet.

Then maybe let's make the last line

0x05 - & - & reserved for future use \\

?