From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 RFC] virtio-spec: flexible configuration layout
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 15:03:13 +0200
Message-ID: <20111111130313.GA24184@redhat.com>
References: <1320150813.3847.24.camel@lappy>
	<20111101124223.GA14060@redhat.com>
	<8739e7uy87.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
	<20111102233110.GA20289@redhat.com>
	<20111108214021.GA4538@redhat.com>
	<20111109195901.GA28155@redhat.com> <1320870287.3730.6.camel@lappy>
	<20111109205208.GA28599@redhat.com>
	<1320872248.3730.11.camel@lappy> <87aa83qoao.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Krishna Kumar <krkumar2@in.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>, Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>,
	Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>,
	lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, penberg@kernel.org,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@gmail.com>,
	Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>, avi@redhat.com
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Return-path: <virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87aa83qoao.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/virtualization>,
	<mailto:virtualization-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/virtualization/>
List-Post: <mailto:virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:virtualization-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization>,
	<mailto:virtualization-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org
Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 02:54:31PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 22:57:28 +0200, Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 22:52 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 10:24:47PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > > It'll be a bit harder deprecating it in the future.
> > > 
> > > Harder than ... what ?
> > 
> > Harder than allowing devices not to present it at all if new layout
> > config is used. Right now the simple implementation is to use MMIO for
> > config and device specific, and let it fallback to legacy for ISR and
> > notifications (and therefore, this is probably how everybody will
> > implement it), which means that when you do want to deprecate legacy,
> > there will be extra work to be done then, instead of doing it now.
> 
> Indeed, I'd like to see two changes to your proposal:
> 
> (1) It should be all or nothing.  If a driver can find the virtio header
>     capability, it should only use the capabilties.  Otherwise, it
>     should fall back to legacy.  Your draft suggests a mix is possible;
>     I prefer a clean failure (ie. one day don't present a BAR 0 *at
>     all*, so ancient drivers just fail to load.).
> (2) There's no huge win in keeping the same layout.  Let's make some
>     cleanups.  There are more users ahead of us then behind us (I
>     hope!).
> But I think this is the right direction!
> 
> Thanks,
> Rusty.

I'll do these changes, thanks!