Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] virtio-msg transport layer

Demi Marie Obenour
2026-02-25T13:12:18Z

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1403 bytes --]

On 2/25/26 08:09, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 07:53:38AM -0500, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>> On 2/25/26 02:45, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>>> Hi Bertrand,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 09:02:12AM +0000, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>>>> Hi Parav,
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>>>>> How can one implement a transport without defining the basic data transfer semantics?
>>>>
>>>> We did a lot of experiments and we are feature equivalent to PCI, MMIO or Channel I/O.
>>>> If anything is missing, we are more than happy to discuss it and solve the issue.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'd love to have this transport over PCI because it addresses the shortcomings
>>> of the existing PCI transport which just assumes that every config space access\
>>> is trap and emulate.
>>
>> Would you mind elaborating on "over PCI"?
>>
>> I can see two meanings for this:
>>
>> 1. Virtio-msg over a physical PCI bus for heterogeneous multiprocessing
>> environments.
>>
>> 2. Virtio-msg over an emulated PCI bus for QEMU, Cloud Hypervisor,
>> and other existing VMMs.
>>
>> Which one are you referring to?
>>
>
> Physical PCI bus, that's why I mentioned 'trap and emulate' which only applies
> to emulated PCI bus.

Is virtio-msg appropriate when the PCI bus is emulated, or should
the existing PCI transport be used instead?
--
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 7253 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]