From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7AB5C25B75 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:45:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sE67I-0008Te-7M; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 07:44:44 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sE67G-0008T2-8e for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 07:44:42 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sE67D-00049V-Ov for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 07:44:41 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0353728.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 453BREXK020215 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:44:33 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc : content-transfer-encoding : content-type : date : from : in-reply-to : message-id : mime-version : references : subject : to; s=pp1; bh=8ObL3Jl4H0bkTGv9lvxj51YTMwiHOsk9zMFe5vWivso=; b=aswccyASENYUAg1ei/nL3dFOlSpzkC4O82D9GehOThQbdg8kK/kiPygSRjWpgdb/G+EI 5q2Pbjq0urEUVF8c92WpEc46/n7KEwuJIntKypU8/rXkFtJ+/mVLxkHTM1s6/RZBkEwt 5aVo+it1eX3pHfk/BWaFkSv/i4Ir8Nf4MyWA8UBcFlIsVzCP3Fu4rjbTXYCRe5e0WVkF tEqsW/Y1h4rkAlUQNrg/JCKFWDraU6e4r0F8+Y7xOAu/AsYQ1FRE9f7OKGYpcqxNhPas iJ0/jll5BcdG6niiz1SAuKKelxlgYa+ULK+HQDgK5te9LWPY4+vvKooaKyG9Imm5fuQ3 6Q== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3yhcyf01fk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 11:44:33 +0000 Received: from m0353728.ppops.net (m0353728.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 453BiW3I022435 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:44:32 GMT Received: from ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (db.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.219]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3yhcyf01fh-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 03 Jun 2024 11:44:32 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 453B7DvC026549; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:44:31 GMT Received: from smtprelay07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.229]) by ppma11.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3yggp2q4w1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 03 Jun 2024 11:44:31 +0000 Received: from smtpav07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.106]) by smtprelay07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 453BiQY751380724 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:44:28 GMT Received: from smtpav07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1704C20043; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:44:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E3A020040; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:44:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-ce58cfcc-320b-11b2-a85c-85e19b5285e0 (unknown [9.171.83.163]) by smtpav07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with SMTP; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 11:44:25 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 13:44:23 +0200 From: Halil Pasic To: Jason Wang Cc: Stefano Garzarella , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Marc Hartmayer , Christian Borntraeger , Boris Fiuczynski , Halil Pasic Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] vhost-vsock: add VIRTIO_F_RING_PACKED to feaure_bits Message-ID: <20240603134423.5d71dbde.pasic@linux.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20240429113334.2454197-1-pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20240527132710.4a7c372f.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20240529141746.2a74ce14.pasic@linux.ibm.com> Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: GkGkppbFqQFc2OkR11ZBRC4XT22hwCQ- X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: ZfMvUJoiXu4YlKczBkKs09S1gicuwrhd X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.650,FMLib:17.12.28.16 definitions=2024-06-03_08,2024-05-30_01,2024-05-17_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1015 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 priorityscore=1501 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2405010000 definitions=main-2406030098 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.156.1; envelope-from=pasic@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Thu, 30 May 2024 10:34:55 +0800 Jason Wang wrote: > > > > IMHO changing the semantic of the VHOST_GET_FEATURES ioctl is not viable, > > but also not necessary. What I am proposing is changing the (in QEMU) > > logic of processing the features returned by VHOST_GET_FEATURES, while > > preserving the outcomes (essentially realize the same function in a > > mathematical sense, but with code that is less fragile), modulo bugs like > > the one addressed with this patch of course. > > Ok, I think I misunderstood you here. Maybe an RFC to see? I will try to hack up an RFC that involves vsock and net so we can discuss the approach. Unfortunately I currently have a lots of other (non-development) stuff on my plate, please bear with me. I suggest to go forward with this patch for fixing vsock, and look if we can do something better for the rest. By the way in the thread with Stefano, I've raised a question about live migration (i.e. what would happen of someone were to implement packed layout for vhost and make add the feature to vhost/net). I would very much like to have your opinion on that! Regards, Halil