[virtio-dev] RE: [PATCH v2 0/2] transport-pci: Introduce legacy registers access using AQ

Parav Pandit
2023-05-15T16:55:13Z

Hi Michael,

> From: virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org <virtio-comment@lists.oasis-
> open.org> On Behalf Of Parav Pandit
> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 5:03 PM
>
> > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 4:58 PM
> >
> > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 08:47:04PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 9:39 AM
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 01:28:40PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > > > This is not the objective to transport all PCI virtio fields over AQ.
> > > > > Transport VQ commands proposal commands and commands in this
> > > > > proposal
> > > > are just fine the way there without quoting it as "transport".
> > > >
> > > > I mean, it's a transport in a sense of where it will reside in e.g.
> > > > linux virtio stack - below virtio core.
> > > > We don't save much code there by reusing the same register layout
> > > > of legacy pci.
> > > > But let's at least make this feature complete, and then we'll see
> > > > whether it is cleaner to reuse legacy layout or build a new one.
> > >
> > > I don't follow your comment about "this feature complete".
> > > When you say _this_, it means the feature proposed in this patch of
> > supporting legacy over PCI VFs?
> > >
> > > If so, anything missing in this proposal?
> >
> > I think I commented at least on what I see as missing is first of all
> > a need to support INT#x emulation since level interrupts are I think not
> supported for VFs.
> > right?
>
> I don't see it mandatory as I responded in [1].
> I didn't see your response on [1].
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/virtio-comment/71d65eb3-c025-9287-0157-
> 81e1d05574d1@nvidia.com/

Do you have any further suggestion, or we can differ the eventq for future when/if there is any real problem?