From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Parav Pandit Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/4] Add virtio Admin Virtqueue Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 03:56:32 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20220124093918.34371-1-mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> <20220124093918.34371-2-mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> <20220126093659-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <292327c4-1916-4237-a96c-13ed013fbef6@nvidia.com> <20220126095925-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20220126095925-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Max Gurtovoy Cc: "virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org" , "cohuck@redhat.com" , "virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org" , "jasowang@redhat.com" , Shahaf Shuler , Oren Duer , "stefanha@redhat.com" List-ID: > From: Michael S. Tsirkin > Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2022 8:34 PM >=20 > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 04:54:22PM +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote: > > > > On 1/26/2022 4:40 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > 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. > > > > We already suggested a special capability for IN_ORDER for AQ and you > > asked to drop it. We drop it and agreed that AQ will be OOO. > > > > Why are we going back here ? >=20 > That's a misunderstanding. Currently all VQs of a device follow same orde= ring. > So I suggested making AQ just follow ordering of rest of VQs of the devic= e. >=20 > > You also mentioned that this patch set is already big enough so why > > solve all the problems we can think of in this one ? >=20 > Right. So just leave the ordering be for now, driver can just skip IN_ORD= ER and > use AQ without it if it wants to. > Ok. I read your same suggestion as what I thought now. It answers my previous email. Thanks.