Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH 1/4] content: Introduce driver/device auxiliary notifications

[Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>]

On Thu, 11 Aug 2022 11:12:06 +0200
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:

> >  
> >> I think making the people not motivated to do the design and write the
> >> spec for all the platforms add to that list is a reasonable middle
> >> ground. It would also make the differences very clear, and the same goes
> >> for the intention (i.e. not omitted by mistake).  
> 
> Hm. On the one hand, I like that it would add a laundry list for
> transports regarding features that might be implemented. 

I believe, all three of us are in agreement on this one. I could hack up
a spec-patch for ccw at some point in time which rectifies things for
the features that are already in the spec.

> In the other
> hand, I think the main problem is not enough people with enough
> understanding and bandwidth to add new features everywhere... but I
> suppose that needs to be fixed in a different place anyway.

I kind of agree, especially with the part that this is not the right
place to fix that problem, if it is a problem. Actually I see this
rather as a strength of virtio: a large amount of freedom in deciding
how much and where to invest. I would rather not specify stuff without
having some sort of a reference implementation, so the ability to
delay specifying how some optional features are to work with virtio-ccw
is very welcome form my perspective.

Regards,
Halil