From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2023 16:42:35 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230110230358.528098-1-parav@nvidia.com> <20230110230358.528098-7-parav@nvidia.com> From: David Hildenbrand Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] [PATCH v3 06/20] virtio-mem-balloon: Maintain mem balloon device spec in separate directory In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Parav Pandit , "mst@redhat.com" , "virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org" , "cohuck@redhat.com" Cc: "virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org" List-ID: On 11.01.23 16:01, Parav Pandit wrote: > Hi David, Hi Parav, > >> From: David Hildenbrand >> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 9:14 AM >> To: Parav Pandit ; mst@redhat.com; virtio-dev@lists.oasis- >> open.org; cohuck@redhat.com >> Cc: virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] [PATCH v3 06/20] virtio-mem-balloon: Maintain mem >> balloon device spec in separate directory >> >> On 11.01.23 00:03, Parav Pandit wrote: >>> Move virtio memory balloon device specification to its own file >>> similar to recent virtio devices. >>> While at it, place device specification, its driver and device >>> conformance into its own directory to have self contained device >>> specification. >>> >>> Fixes: https://github.com/oasis-tcs/virtio-spec/issues/153 >>> Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit >>> >> >> There is virtio-mem and there is virtio-balloon. Calling virtio-balloon "virtio- >> mem-balloon" can easily lead to quite some confusion. Any particular reason >> why not to stick to "virtio-balloon" ? >> > Historically Linux memory balloon driver in linux is placed as virtio_balloon.c See below. id=5 has widespread "virtio-balloon" terminology use. id=13 is what creates confusion. > In virtio spec, in the device type is it named as "Traditional memory balloon device". > So, I named the directory name close to actual spec content name. > Adding legacy/traditional was too long. :) > May be virtio-mem-legacy is better to differentiate between legacy and new mem device? As it has nothing to do with virtio-mem, that would be confusing. Also, legacy doesn't quite catch the semantics. > > In this patchset, directories are named with "virtio-" prefix such as virtio-pmem, virtio-sound. > > Another option (which I prefer as I write now) is, > How about we drop "virtio-" prefix in the directory name because this is the virtio spec. > > And have names as > device-types/sound > device-types/legacy-mem-balloon > device-types/mem > device-types/pmem > > This is short and covers balloon part too? Looking at https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220516204913.542894-71-mst@redhat.com/ We seem to have virtio-balloon (id=5) and virtio-mem-balloon (if=13). virtio-balloon is what's actually implemented and used. "Traditional" is a bit misleading here. IMHO, we could/should * Name it "balloon" here * Make "id=13" reserved and remove the notion of "memory balloon" from the spec * Call "id=5" "Memory Balloon" and remove the notion of "Traditional". It's the one that exists. @MST? -- Thanks, David / dhildenb