All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>
Cc: "virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org"
	<virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>,
	"cohuck@redhat.com" <cohuck@redhat.com>,
	"virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org"
	<virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>,
	Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] transport-pci: Move transitional device id to legacy section
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 02:29:54 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230227022459-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <PH0PR12MB54811B0B6E6E95A659DA41B0DCAF9@PH0PR12MB5481.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 02:54:09AM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> 
> 
> > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2023 6:00 PM
> > 
> > On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 12:06:36AM +0200, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > Currently PCI device requirements section contains mix of normative
> > > statements for for regular (non transitional) device and transitional
> > > device under one section.
> > >
> > > Some requirements of the transitional device are also located in
> > > legacy interface section which is the right section for it.
> > >
> > > Hence,
> > > 1. Move transitional device requirements to their designated Legacy
> > >    interface section
> > > 2. Describe regular device requirements without quoting it as "non
> > >    transitional device"
> > >
> > > While at it, write the description using a singular object definition.
> > >
> > > This is only an editorial change.
> > >
> > > This patch is on top of [1].
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-dev/202302/msg00578.html
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>
> > 
> > nack I already answered this. legacy sections describe legacy interface of
> > transitional devices.
> > 
> Legacy device id of the transitional device is 0x1000 for net. 
> Legacy revision id of the transitional device is 0x0.
> Why revision id belongs to legacy section, but device id doesn't?
> Still trying to understand this convoluted policy.
> Will re-read your email again if that is explained somehow without bringing the driver in context.

It's convoluted because legacy is convoluted. It's a bolt-on.
We have a modern description. Is says e.g. "A".
Then legacy chapter comes and say "yea but legacy is B".
This is not how spec normally works.


The rule is this: one should be able to ignore legacy
sections if not building a legacy driver/device.

If you are building a modern driver it must support transitional
devices. Thus is must know about id 0x1000.
Conclusion - 0x1000 is out of legacy section.


If you are building a modern driver it ignores revision.
But legacy drivers used revision 0.
So a transitional device has 0 to make legacy drivers work.
Conclusion - revision 0 is in the legacy section.






-- 
MST


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>
Cc: "virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org"
	<virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>,
	"cohuck@redhat.com" <cohuck@redhat.com>,
	"virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org"
	<virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>,
	Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@nvidia.com>
Subject: [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] transport-pci: Move transitional device id to legacy section
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 02:29:54 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230227022459-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
Message-ID: <20230227072954.yKLVlmPrIBQdg6xO_3duWCAziaPcyOU4UY1uoiytsaY@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <PH0PR12MB54811B0B6E6E95A659DA41B0DCAF9@PH0PR12MB5481.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 02:54:09AM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> 
> 
> > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2023 6:00 PM
> > 
> > On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 12:06:36AM +0200, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > Currently PCI device requirements section contains mix of normative
> > > statements for for regular (non transitional) device and transitional
> > > device under one section.
> > >
> > > Some requirements of the transitional device are also located in
> > > legacy interface section which is the right section for it.
> > >
> > > Hence,
> > > 1. Move transitional device requirements to their designated Legacy
> > >    interface section
> > > 2. Describe regular device requirements without quoting it as "non
> > >    transitional device"
> > >
> > > While at it, write the description using a singular object definition.
> > >
> > > This is only an editorial change.
> > >
> > > This patch is on top of [1].
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-dev/202302/msg00578.html
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>
> > 
> > nack I already answered this. legacy sections describe legacy interface of
> > transitional devices.
> > 
> Legacy device id of the transitional device is 0x1000 for net. 
> Legacy revision id of the transitional device is 0x0.
> Why revision id belongs to legacy section, but device id doesn't?
> Still trying to understand this convoluted policy.
> Will re-read your email again if that is explained somehow without bringing the driver in context.

It's convoluted because legacy is convoluted. It's a bolt-on.
We have a modern description. Is says e.g. "A".
Then legacy chapter comes and say "yea but legacy is B".
This is not how spec normally works.


The rule is this: one should be able to ignore legacy
sections if not building a legacy driver/device.

If you are building a modern driver it must support transitional
devices. Thus is must know about id 0x1000.
Conclusion - 0x1000 is out of legacy section.


If you are building a modern driver it ignores revision.
But legacy drivers used revision 0.
So a transitional device has 0 to make legacy drivers work.
Conclusion - revision 0 is in the legacy section.






-- 
MST


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org


  reply	other threads:[~2023-02-27  7:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-25 22:06 [PATCH v1 0/2] Move transitional dev req to legacy interface Parav Pandit
2023-02-25 22:06 ` [virtio-dev] " Parav Pandit
2023-02-25 22:06 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] transport-pci: Use lowecase alphabets Parav Pandit
2023-02-25 22:06   ` [virtio-dev] " Parav Pandit
2023-02-25 22:06 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] transport-pci: Move transitional device id to legacy section Parav Pandit
2023-02-25 22:06   ` [virtio-dev] " Parav Pandit
2023-02-25 22:59   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2023-02-25 22:59     ` [virtio-dev] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2023-02-27  2:54     ` Parav Pandit
2023-02-27  2:54       ` [virtio-dev] " Parav Pandit
2023-02-27  7:29       ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2023-02-27  7:29         ` [virtio-dev] " Michael S. Tsirkin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20230227022459-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
    --to=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=parav@nvidia.com \
    --cc=shahafs@nvidia.com \
    --cc=virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org \
    --cc=virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.