[virtio-comment] Re: [virtio-dev] [PATCH v10 0/8] Rename queue index to queue number

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Mar 30 2023, Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:23:33 +0300
> Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com> wrote:
>
>> 1. Currently, virtqueue is identified between driver and device
>> interchangeably using either number or index terminology.
>> 
>> 2. Between PCI and MMIO transport the queue size (depth) is
>> defined as queue_size and QueueNum respectively.
>> 
>> To avoid confusion and to have consistency, unify them to use Number.
>> 
>> Solution:
>> a. Use virtqueue number description, and rename MMIO register as QueueSize.
>
> I'm in favor of replacing number with size where appropriate.
>
>> b. Replace virtqueue index with virtqueue number
>
> I don't see the benefit of replacing virtqueue index with virtqueue
> number.
>
> Currently virtqueue number is only used in the parts that describe
> notifications (Guest->Host), the rest of the spec uses virtqueue index.
>
> I argue that using a different term in that context than in the rest
> of the specification makes sense, because in the context of notifications
> the virtqueue isn't always identified by its index.
>
> More precisely: if VIRTIO_F_NOTIF_CONFIG_DATA has been negotiated in the
> context of notifications the virtqueue is identified by the
> so called "queue_notify_data"; if VIRTIO_F_NOTIF_CONFIG_DATA has been
> negotiated in the context of notifications the virtqueue is identified by
> the virtqueue index (as usual, for example in queue_select, or in
> the ccws).
>
> As I've pointed out in my comment to patch 2, I believe replacing
> virtqueue index with virtqueue number is detrimental to clarity.
>
> Thus please find a counter-proposal below. If there is interest
> I can make a series out of it, and prettify it. If I can't convince
> you guys, then I will have to get used to vqn and virtqueue number.

I would generally prefer "index" as well, but there seemed to be a
strong sentiment that we should go with "number"... so, what *is* the
actual general sentiment? It's hard to say, but maybe most people are
fine with either?

>
> AFAIR the other problem with index was the RSS for virtio-net. But there
> we are currently heading down a direction of introducing a new
> abstraction. This approach avoids confusion around the term 'virtqueue
> index' as much as it avoids confusion around the term 'virtqueue nuber'.
>
>
>> c. RSS area of virtio net has inherited some logic, describe it
>> using abstract rss_rq_id.
>
> -------------------------8<--------------------------------------
> From: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 17:57:53 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] content: clarify how virtques are identified
>
> Clarify how virtqueues are identified in the context of
> available notifications and in the context of RSS for
> virtio-net .
>
> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  content.tex                      | 15 ++++++++++-----
>  device-types/net/description.tex | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  transport-ccw.tex                |  2 +-
>  transport-pci.tex                |  7 ++++---
>  4 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

(...)

> +struct rss_rq_id {
> +   le16 value; /* virtqueue index divided by two */
> +};
> +
>  struct virtio_net_rss_config {
>      le32 hash_types;
>      le16 indirection_table_mask;
> -    le16 unclassified_queue;
> -    le16 indirection_table[indirection_table_length];
> +    struct rss_rq_id unclassified_queue;
> +    struct rss_rq_id indirection_table[indirection_table_length];
>      le16 max_tx_vq;
>      u8 hash_key_length;
>      u8 hash_key_data[hash_key_length];
>  };
>  \end{lstlisting}
> +
> +The type struct rss\_rq\_id is introduced to better distinguish receive queue
> +ids form other integral fields.
> +
> +A receive queue id is only defined for receive queues, as the virtqueue index
> +of the receive virtqueue divided by two (the virtqueue index of a receive
> +queue is always even). For example receiveq4 is identified by the virtqueue
> +index 6 and the receive queue id 3.

FWIW, I think this is much easier to understand.


This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the
OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) TC.

In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and
to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
before posting.

Subscribe: virtio-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
Unsubscribe: virtio-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
List help: virtio-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
List archive: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-comment/
Feedback License: https://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
List Guidelines: https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/mailing-lists
Committee: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/virtio/
Join OASIS: https://www.oasis-open.org/join/