Re: [virtio] Feedback: PCI device spec

[Rusty Russell <rusty@au1.ibm.com>]

Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 16:58 +0000, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> ATM you can put any value that makes sense there I think, drivers will bind
>> and work.
>
> That's true, I'm fine with this.
>
> But try to put yourself into such guy's shoes. You know nothing about
> virtio. You have to implement a virtio PCI device for your custom
> system. You're looking at the PCI spec, which tells you that you've got
> to put some values into the device's configuration space. And the virtio
> spec doesn't tell you what numbers should you use.
>
> I appreciate it's convenient for us not to specify such details. Maybe
> it's the right thing to do. But I also understand my colleague's
> frustration with this aspect of the spec. Thus the discussion.

This.

The spec *exists* so we get more, good implementations.

What helps this?  Including a non-normative paragraph discussing use of
PCI class?  Or ignoring it and leaving implementers confused and
frustrated so we look more rigorous?

In fact, let me now offer a beer to anyone on the committee who adds a
decent joke to the spec.  Because the spec is for humans, and I want
readers to like it so much they tell their friends to implement it.

Thanks,
Rusty.