From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Williamson Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 4/6] docs: Add Documentation for Mediated devices Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:59:55 -0600 Message-ID: <20161012095955.192affc5@t450s.home> References: <1476131317-358-1-git-send-email-kwankhede@nvidia.com> <1476131317-358-5-git-send-email-kwankhede@nvidia.com> <20161011141411.GH14917@redhat.com> <08c939a3-c78e-a457-1978-794ffb50ee2c@nvidia.com> <6814afb2-3e39-f1c9-8944-489391e948e2@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Song, Jike" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "Tian, Kevin" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "cjia@nvidia.com" , "kraxel@redhat.com" , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "bjsdjshi@linux.vnet.ibm.com" To: Kirti Wankhede Return-path: In-Reply-To: <6814afb2-3e39-f1c9-8944-489391e948e2@nvidia.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 20:43:48 +0530 Kirti Wankhede wrote: > On 10/12/2016 7:22 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote: > >> From: Kirti Wankhede [mailto:kwankhede@nvidia.com] > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 4:45 AM > >>>> +* mdev_supported_types: > >>>> + List of current supported mediated device types and its details are added > >>>> +in this directory in following format: > >>>> + > >>>> +|- > >>>> +|--- Vendor-specific-attributes [optional] > >>>> +|--- mdev_supported_types > >>>> +| |--- > >>>> +| | |--- create > >>>> +| | |--- name > >>>> +| | |--- available_instances > >>>> +| | |--- description /class > >>>> +| | |--- [devices] > >>>> +| |--- > >>>> +| | |--- create > >>>> +| | |--- name > >>>> +| | |--- available_instances > >>>> +| | |--- description /class > >>>> +| | |--- [devices] > >>>> +| |--- > >>>> +| |--- create > >>>> +| |--- name > >>>> +| |--- available_instances > >>>> +| |--- description /class > >>>> +| |--- [devices] > >>>> + > >>>> +[TBD : description or class is yet to be decided. This will change.] > >>> > >>> I thought that in previous discussions we had agreed to drop > >>> the concept and use the name as the unique identifier. > >>> When reporting these types in libvirt we won't want to report > >>> the type id values - we'll want the name strings to be unique. > >>> > >> > >> The 'name' might not be unique but type_id will be. For example that Neo > >> pointed out in earlier discussion, virtual devices can come from two > >> different physical devices, end user would be presented with what they > >> had selected but there will be internal implementation differences. In > >> that case 'type_id' will be unique. > >> > > > > Hi, Kirti, my understanding is that Neo agreed to use an unique type > > string (if you still called it ), and then no need of additional > > 'name' field which can be put inside 'description' field. See below quote: > > > > We had internal discussions about this within NVIDIA and found that > 'name' might not be unique where as 'type_id' would be unique. I'm > refering to Neo's mail after that, where Neo do pointed that out. > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-09/msg07714.html Everyone not privy to those internal discussions, including me, seems to think we dropped type_id and that if a vendor does not have a stable name, they can compose some sort of stable type description based on the name+id, or even vendor+id, ex. NVIDIA-11. So please share why we haven't managed to kill off type_id yet. No matter what internal representation each vendor driver has of "type_id" it seems possible for it to come up with stable string to define a given configuration. Thanks, Alex