From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9184311587 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2026 10:22:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772014962; cv=none; b=ot8QCfbXu5yIXYnZQ6Ol/HhLYGHGKTaTyNc01OI7fn6lCTjsA73bw4gibLxSuSAeA9a45lLVNPrSh5l72szHCW4e9pfddqZbRzg2tR4HZwvaplhhj7EVQP3dZa97u3p+kmfj9l5upEDGX9+8Z8oc4lOmfXoqe0ZZtXRQZP+AdSM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772014962; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pGeiK8M1drKD6CZXTDlfLRvvvUdopLxwLKeDSiYdNyY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Disposition; b=CpPd2X4quH8Dr/Dl0P0tS5Wy1a68BDdjN2kv4IyZS5xrl+bvhvpuGqLefzB3kHv3Kw6GrGmJtE5HLqdeMeQtAUtWas6C/podK3hrpC6d1JV68sr5jOhVcbFJDV8KSQnMuIAdqzajndW7vYWvUQ8dkPhfJF7X7WoIlGb8rK6LUWY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=YsXlGplr; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="YsXlGplr" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1772014960; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=W/5mOUuoZ92LGIysFCAWAJHGLtiGM92wm8AAKKbAqao=; b=YsXlGplrSy1VP2ql5gYrBJ9koazNByM/Nn47i/xf8DURf2PvtkmPv+60JpbLsITgktpOUk WwkQerfCm0e6sO/N5zW0flthgSe+CLT3P0p5qAdlq5jOKnHIxWW+k1gXqF68gCFueHuS+T kP/KHxPvkyljhulctdsdELQEj9BQiCQ= Received: from mail-wm1-f70.google.com (mail-wm1-f70.google.com [209.85.128.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-168-jsRRB40_NJess7m4xPjQIg-1; Wed, 25 Feb 2026 05:22:39 -0500 X-MC-Unique: jsRRB40_NJess7m4xPjQIg-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: jsRRB40_NJess7m4xPjQIg_1772014958 Received: by mail-wm1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-483101623e9so57253685e9.3 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2026 02:22:39 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1772014958; x=1772619758; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=W/5mOUuoZ92LGIysFCAWAJHGLtiGM92wm8AAKKbAqao=; b=kg44yX+Et/sN0+auNejEAAfeyj3MeQRLkvKxrY1PIIT6G8aFJTMrlT3xNmnveRGoZH Zie5FqAOe1jZM8mzdfo0Vt0k9YLZIXd/bXfYWQoKVKMKeWaspnRqaz3odYIFs0P1gddG uhAXX3O2VA5ssv36kaaJ6zkvBcbMdsS6f1tjahfvpEQJH80qyECOzEaj3HR7vKe2td0k 80hb4VFH0IulDGubVVg7zvQLffKj72CvpdxzfcWQHXVU6K1svOOjYNDrSlKsJRp5lV8j YPA+3gqQ0J/MHOIekKgyMm4TQQJFdygK2K6MXIvY1zhwpPPN0FsGbi39J9nVMlNi3sHG +hYA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUOTrYK4CoydM+9XAu0SY+prfYfNy32rRZzC/wseWxii5zgQ7ViyqacBOMFGwGNyv6meypN35c4pnAyY3BNqg==@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyeaZfGIq1NpAJvX1Czj2ZgBAor8ueHTEMBaqxzO71KvPbmOIqU E2BHebyWZ8CjrUx5iNTwF+xbQFUQKEKyEP7ltra5ZBnAcXVU4aOYzxijcmVBGvLJFleR/YvPFuh s6gLDhb9c9E0MO6SzR1jkaCwwPgx8TUQt1TI8CEG4DnRZw9OUcCh3kXyAjf+epBxAK4Kl X-Gm-Gg: ATEYQzw5Qs0sTWBhS1csK/HcbI6KLphNhGo6mbKF0iHGAeHzpcFetBEKl/kp9APKLms EivpDDKzGy76jGQP5PDAgQ9eG9DOJGkG44rHXvBqWkelzsFXyGDBqaNGG/8AKJMT7znEKZTJQtc cEsxzsQz2gPaF95jIoUHnStysNwOYZe3HikoJaTRKL53nmBMmYPxd1M4Xe2MQgvsce7UAgEkqB0 5JpBodJLuIV8qSnb9Ru3r3BwvouP1RN4BerOzyGR2+ymU9l4j4qmiFGwCfixyu4g65I1dkuykOQ ZYd7KMqjFa12ieqWkeredsTFLH1SkZIagezS9EwC0d/htTsZrUQPWuXv/QrW8KpOBCCirFi0go3 0GdkKmMIN2+r+5Rl834rSFuw5tquHlLcVemWunlKq6crotw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:19c9:b0:477:79c7:8994 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-483a963d2d9mr226891075e9.30.1772014958137; Wed, 25 Feb 2026 02:22:38 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:19c9:b0:477:79c7:8994 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-483a963d2d9mr226890055e9.30.1772014956820; Wed, 25 Feb 2026 02:22:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from redhat.com (IGLD-80-230-79-166.inter.net.il. [80.230.79.166]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-483bd68826asm90970035e9.0.2026.02.25.02.22.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 25 Feb 2026 02:22:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 05:22:32 -0500 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Manivannan Sadhasivam Cc: Bertrand Marquis , Parav Pandit , "Bill Mills (bill.mills@linaro.org)" , "virtio-comment@lists.linux.dev" , "Edgar E . Iglesias" , Arnaud Pouliquen , Viresh Kumar , Alex Bennee , Armelle Laine Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] virtio-msg transport layer Message-ID: <20260225051849-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20260126163230.1122685-1-bill.mills@linaro.org> <20260219185034-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <359B0C17-9D57-423A-A229-6CEDA19C975A@arm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: virtio-comment@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: 7ntR4E5Bv5icUKIoISWPdpgb4a-XV1eRIFVKbap0l6g_1772014958 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 03:36:36PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > > But that being said, I somewhat agree with Parav that we should define the bus > > > implementations in the spec to avoid fixing the ABI in the implementations. For > > > instance, if we try to use this transport over PCI, we've got questions like: > > > > > > 1. How the device should be bind to the virtio-msg-pci bus driver and not with > > > the existing virtio-pci driver? Should it use a new Vendor ID or Sub-IDs? > > > > One bus is appearing as one pci device with its own Vendor ID, > > > > What should be the 'own Vendor ID' here? > > The existing virtio-pci driver binds to all devices with the Vendor ID of > PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT_QUMRANET. So are you expecting the Vendors to use their own > VID for exposing the Virtio devices? That would mean, the drivers on the host > need update as well, which will not scale. > > It would be good if the existing virtio-pci devices can use this new transport > with only device side modifications. ah maybe i misuderstand. you do not mean do not change drivers. you mean a generic driver for everyone? there are several ways to address this in pci - use a shared vendor/device id: worked so far reasonably well for virtio. we can allocate a new range of device ids or a new vendor id. - class / prog ifc it seems like a cleaner solution but will preclude declaring e.g. a virtio net interface as a network interface. -- MST