From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 RFC] virtio-pci: flexible configuration layout Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:49:33 +0200 Message-ID: <20111123084932.GF22734@redhat.com> References: <20111122183621.GA5235@redhat.com> <87hb1v1scp.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87hb1v1scp.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Rusty Russell Cc: Krishna Kumar , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Pawel Moll , Wang Sheng-Hui , Alexey Kardashevskiy , lkml - Kernel Mailing List , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Christian Borntraeger , Sasha Levin , Amit Shah List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 01:02:22PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > +/* Fields in VIRTIO_PCI_CAP_COMMON_CFG: */ > +struct virtio_pci_common_cfg { > + /* About the whole device. */ > + __u64 device_features; /* read-only */ > + __u64 guest_features; /* read-write */ We currently require atomic accesses to common fields. Some architectures might not have such for 64 bit, so these need to be split I think ... > + __u64 queue_address; /* read-write */ > + __u16 msix_config; /* read-write */ > + __u8 device_status; /* read-write */ > + __u8 unused; > + > + /* About a specific virtqueue. */ > + __u16 queue_select; /* read-write */ > + __u16 queue_align; /* read-write, power of 2. */ > + __u16 queue_size; /* read-write, power of 2. */ > + __u16 queue_msix_vector;/* read-write */ > +}; > #endif > >