Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH REPOST v19 1/2] virtio-crypto: Add virtio crypto device specification

[Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On 09/18/2017 02:13 PM, Gonglei (Arei) wrote:
>> Destroy does not need to specify queue_id. That means session_id's aren't
>> queue scoped from namespace perspective. The question remains what is
>> queue_id good for, and whether a session type op request should be
>> rejected if the the session id originates from a session creation
>> request specifying a different dataqueue (not the dataqueue containing
>> the given request)?
>>
> My original idea about the queue_id is using the queue_id to specify which
> datequeue of the following data requests will be used. But after deep thinking,
> I find that the queue_id is superfluous, and the current code in QEMU also
> don't use the queue_id value as well. That's because the we can use session_id
> to find the pervious session information and get the current dataqueue id
> from the used virtqueue .
> 
> So maybe we should drop the queue_id this time.
> 
> 

Sounds reasonable to me. We can make it reserved and ignored in
the specification. Linux uses it, but it's always set to 0 as we only
support one data-queue (if I'm not wrong). So reserved and must be zero
is an option too.

Halil