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, 30 Nov 2011 09:18:06 +0200 Message-ID: <20111130071805.GC17781@redhat.com> References: <20111122183621.GA5235@redhat.com> <87hb1v1scp.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20111123084640.GE22734@redhat.com> <87ty5uxso3.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20111124070728.GH29994@redhat.com> <87vcq5t69c.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20111128084009.GB20084@redhat.com> <87sjl6tsnm.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: <87sjl6tsnm.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 30, 2011 at 09:58:45AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > I think I see a way to do that in a relatively painless way. > > Do you prefer seeing driver patches or spec? Or are you not interested > > in reusing the same structure at all? > > I think we should look at code at this point; my gut says we're going to > be not-quite-similar-enough-to-be-useful. At which point, a clean-slate > approach is more appealing. But the code will show, one way or another. > > Thanks, > Rusty. Makes sense, absolutely. So I'll hack on it and post and we can judge the result. One small comment that I'm afraid was lost in the noise is that we should not add any 64 bit fields in the common area, because there's no generic iowrite64/ioread64. -- MST