From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220124093918.34371-1-mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> <20220124093918.34371-2-mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> <20220126093659-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: From: Jason Wang Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 11:56:10 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Add virtio Admin Virtqueue Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" To: Parav Pandit Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Max Gurtovoy , "virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org" , "cohuck@redhat.com" , "virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org" , Shahaf Shuler , Oren Duer , "stefanha@redhat.com" List-ID: On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 11:55 AM Parav Pandit wrote: > > > > From: Michael S. Tsirkin > > Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2022 8:11 PM > > > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 11:39:15AM +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote: > > > +Regardless of device offering VIRTIO_F_IN_ORDER, admin queue command > > > +buffers are used by the device in out of order manner. > > > > Instead of special-casing AQ I'd like to see a generic capability addressing this > > need. For example, TX for virtio net might benefit from this too. And I'd like to > > mention, again, VIRTIO_F_PARTIAL_ORDER proposal as one, arguably cleaner > > and more generic way to address this. > > And if that's not adequate I'd like to address that as part of the > > PARTIAL_ORDER proposal, this kind of per-queue in order was definitely on > > the radar as it was formulated. > As we dropped other less important items from this proposal because it was too big. > I am going to keep the PARTIAL_ORDER also out of this one. It falls in same bucket. > > So AQ follows same ordering rules as other queues. > Are you ok with this in v3? I'm fine with this. Thanks >