virtio — archive
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
— [Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Month Index]
| [List Home]
[PATCH v10 00/10] Introduce device group and device management
On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 01:41:37PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 12:54:52PM CET, [email protected] wrote:
>
>On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 01:22:30PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 02:05:22PM CET, [email protected] wrote:
> >>
>Add commands to find out which commands does each group support,
> >>
>as well as enable their use by driver.
> >>
>This will be especially useful once we have multiple group types.
> >> >
> >>
>An alternative is per-type VQs. This is possible but will
> >>
>require more per-transport work. Discovery through the vq
> >>
>helps keep things contained.
> >> >
> >>
>Signed-off-by: Max Gurtovoy <[email protected]>
> >>
>Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>
> >> >+
> >> >+The driver issues the command VIRTIO_ADMIN_CMD_LIST_QUERY to
> >> >+query the list of commands valid for this group and before sending
> >> >+any commands for any member of a group.
> >> >+
> >> >+The driver then enables use of some of the opcodes by sending to
> >> >+the device the command VIRTIO_ADMIN_CMD_LIST_USE with a subset
> >> >+of the list returned by VIRTIO_ADMIN_CMD_LIST_QUERY that is
> >> >+both understood and used by the driver.
> >>
> >> To my untrained ear, this sounds somewhat similar to the feature
> >> negotiantion mechanism. Why the fact that device/driver supports some
> >> command can't be covered by just another feature? Looks like unnecassary
> >> complexicity to negotiate supported commands like this.
> >
>
>Absolutely, it is similar. The issue is that a single device can
>
>be an owner for multiple group types.
>
>For example, I think an SRIOV PF itself can have subfunctions with SIOV
>
>as well as virtual functions with SRIOV.
>
>And the set of supported commands might differ.
> >
>
>We thus need a command that is kind of like features but per group type.
>
> I see. But that does not mean it can't be done using existing features:
>
> _F_SRIOV_CMD1
> _F_SRIOV_CMD2
> ..
> _F_SIOV_CMD1
> _F_SIOV_CMD2
> ...
True. But annoying if each command has to be duplicated.
> >
>
>As a small bonus as we are building this from scratch, I added
>
>something which was requested for a long time from features
>
>which is blocking access to commands not allowed by features.
>
>With standard virtio features we trust the driver not to send
>
>commands before enabling a feature and this was considered
>
>a maintainance/security problem.
>
> I understand. Is it unfixable for features not to break buggy drivers?
>
I think it is, feature negotiation is hard to evolve since our
compat strategy is built around feature negotiation.
--
MST
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
— [Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Month Index]
| [List Home]