Re: [RFC] ALSA: vsnd: Add Xen para-virtualized frontend driver

From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@epam.com>
To: Takashi Sakamoto <o-takashi@sakamocchi.jp>,
	tiwai@suse.com, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xen.org,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <andr2000@gmail.com>,
	Oleksandr Grytsov <al1img@gmail.com>,
	Clemens Ladisch <clemens@ladisch.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC] ALSA: vsnd: Add Xen para-virtualized frontend driver
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2017 11:55:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <80469e00-fa86-3ecd-6394-43e4aa88b41d@epam.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b229c2d1-7628-d6dd-73f1-94a4a4106f52@sakamocchi.jp>


On 11/02/2017 11:44 AM, Takashi Sakamoto wrote:
> On Oct 30 2017 15:33, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>> This is an attempt to summarize previous discussions on Xen para-virtual
>> sound driver.
>>
>> A first attempt has been made to upstream the driver [1] which 
>> brought number
>> of fundamental questions, one of the biggest ones was that the 
>> frontend driver
>> has no means to synchronize its period elapsed event with the host 
>> driver,
>> but uses software emulation on the guest side [2] with a timer.
>> In order to address this a change to the existing Xen para-virtual sound
>> protocol [3] was proposed to fill this gap [4] and remove emulation:
>> 1. Introduced a new event channel from back to front
>> 2. New event with number of bytes played/captured (XENSND_EVT_CUR_POS,
>> to be used for sending snd_pcm_period_elapsed at frontend
>> (in Linux implementation, sent in bytes, not frames to make the protocol
>> generic and consistent)
>> 3. New request for playback/capture control (XENSND_OP_TRIGGER) with
>> start/pause/stop/resume sub-ops.
>>
>> Along with these changes other comments on the driver were addressed,
>> e.g. split into smaller chunks, moved the driver from misc to xen 
>> etc. [5].
>>
>> Hope, this helps to get the full picture of what was discussed and 
>> makes it
>> possible to move forward: if the approach seems ok, then I'll start
>> upstreaming the changes to the sndif protocol and then will send the 
>> updated
>> version of the driver for the further review.
>
> This message has below line in its header.
>
> > In-Reply-To: <e56a09e9-da66-b748-4e82-4b96a18cef32@gmail.com>
>
> This field is defined in RFC822[1], and recent mail clients use this 
> header field to associate the message to a message which the field 
> indicates. This results in a series of messages, so-called 'message 
> thread'. Iwai-san would like you to start a new message thread for 
> your topic. Would you please post this message again without the 
> header field?
of course, sorry about that
>
> Generally, receiving no reactions means that readers/reviewers don't 
> get enough information for your idea yet. (Of course, there's a 
> probability that your work attracts no one...) In this case, 
> submitting more resources is better, rather than requesting comments 
> to them. For instance, you can point links to backend/frontend 
> implementation as para-virtualization drivers which use the new 
> feature of interface, if you did work for it. Indicating procedure to 
> use a series of your work is better for test, if possible.
>
will do
> [1] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0822.txt
>
> Regards
>
> Takashi Sakamoto
Thank you,
Oleksandr