From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 08:53:48 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/2] Add virtio Admin Virtqueue specification Message-ID: <20210728085136-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20210726165254.8529-1-mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> <87im0v4yrj.fsf@redhat.com> <3657bbc8-3299-97a5-b45a-04030da35c51@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3657bbc8-3299-97a5-b45a-04030da35c51@nvidia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline To: Max Gurtovoy Cc: Cornelia Huck , Stefan Hajnoczi , virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org, jasowang@redhat.com, oren@nvidia.com, parav@nvidia.com, shahafs@nvidia.com, eperezma@redhat.com, aadam@redhat.com, bodong@nvidia.com, amikheev@nvidia.com List-ID: On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 06:29:49PM +0300, Max Gurtovoy wrote: > Vendor specific is also important to allow vendors develop their special > souse. Most of the value of virtio is that it's generic. So we added VIRTIO_PCI_CAP_VENDOR_CFG which is very easy for the hypervisor to intercept. Maybe that is not enough but that needs justification, I am not sure it's a good idea to add multiple ways devices can differ without a lot of thought. -- MST