From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51140) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TLaO1-0004j9-Q6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2012 10:02:23 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TLaNv-0001aV-Bt for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2012 10:02:17 -0400 Received: from e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com ([195.75.94.109]:49839) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TLaNv-0001ZQ-3X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2012 10:02:11 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 9 Oct 2012 15:02:08 +0100 Received: from d06av04.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av04.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.216]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q99E1ww457737268 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2012 14:01:58 GMT Received: from d06av04.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d06av04.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q99E24I9019364 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2012 08:02:04 -0600 Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 16:02:01 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20121009160201.5303a7ca@BR9GNB5Z> In-Reply-To: <87zk4c2tqq.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> References: <87zk4c2tqq.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Proposal for virtio standardization. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Rusty Russell Cc: Ohad Ben-Cohen , Anthony Liguori , Avishay Traeger , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Pawel Moll , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel , Jason Wang , LKML , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Avi Kivity , Adam Litke , Amit Shah , Paolo Bonzini , Sasha Levin On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:59:33 +0930 Rusty Russell wrote: > Hi all, > > I've had several requests for a more formal approach to the > virtio draft spec, and (after some soul-searching) I'd like to try that. > > The proposal is to use OASIS as the standards body, as it's > fairly light-weight as these things go. For me this means paperwork and > setting up a Working Group and getting the right people involved as > Voting members starting with the current contributors; for most of you > it just means a new mailing list, though I'll be cross-posting any > drafts and major changes here anyway. > > I believe that a documented standard (aka virtio 1.0) will > increase visibility and adoption in areas outside our normal linux/kvm > universe. There's been some of that already, but this is the clearest > path to accelerate it. Not the easiest path, but I believe that a solid > I/O standard is a Good Thing for everyone. > > Yet I also want to decouple new and experimental development > from the standards effort; running code comes first. New feature bits > and new device numbers should be reservable without requiring a full > spec change. > > So the essence of my proposal is: > 1) I start a Working Group within OASIS where we can aim for virtio spec > 1.0. > > 2) The current spec is textually reordered so the core is clearly > bus-independent, with PCI, mmio, etc appendices. > > 3) Various clarifications, formalizations and cleanups to the spec text, > and possibly elimination of old deprecated features. > > 4) The only significant change to the spec is that we use PCI > capabilities, so we can have infinite feature bits. > (see > http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/virtualization/2011-December/019198.html) "Infinite" only applies to virtio-pci, no? > > 5) Changes to the ring layout and other such things are deferred to a > future virtio version; whether this is done within OASIS or > externally depends on how well this works for the 1.0 release. > > Thoughts? > Rusty. > Sounds like a good idea. I'll be happy to review the spec with an eye to virtio-ccw. Cornelia