From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Coquelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] vhost: Introduce vhost-user's REPLY_ACK feature Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 11:14:46 +0100 Message-ID: <68cbccdb-40ca-7cc7-1f78-6823aa4c960c@redhat.com> References: <20161212175400.7978-1-maxime.coquelin@redhat.com> <20161213095602.GC18991@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <20161213100306.GD18991@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Yuanhan Liu Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C561F370 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 11:14:50 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <20161213100306.GD18991@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 12/13/2016 11:03 AM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:57:10AM +0100, Maxime Coquelin wrote: >> >> >> On 12/13/2016 10:56 AM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: >>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 06:54:00PM +0100, Maxime Coquelin wrote: >>>> REPLY_ACK features provide a generic way for QEMU to ensure both >>>> completion and success of a request. >>>> >>>> As described in vhost-user spec in QEMU repository, QEMU sets >>>> VHOST_USER_NEED_REPLY flag (bit 3) when expecting a reply_ack from >>>> the backend. Backend must reply with 0 for success or non-zero >>>> otherwise when flag is set. >>>> >>>> Currently, only VHOST_USER_SET_MEM_TABLE request implements reply_ack, >>>> in order to synchronize mapping updates. >>>> >>>> This patch enables REPLY_ACK feature generally, but only checks error >>>> code for VHOST_USER_SET_MEM_TABLE. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Maxime Coquelin >>> >>> Thanks for the patch: it looks good and straightforward to me. >> Good! >> >>> >>>> --- >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> The intend of this patch is not to fix a known issue, but it is >>>> nice to have this feature, and it will be used by upcoming MTU >>>> feature if it remains in its current form. >>> >>> Just asking, when do you plan to send out the patches? >> As soon as QEMU part is accepted, because changes in QEMU series >> may impact DPDK's one. > > But maybe you could send them out earlier, so that we could have > understand it better? Sure, makes sense. I'll try to send a RFC next week, that we could merge only once QEMU part accepted. Thanks, Maxime