From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
Xie Yongji <xieyongji@bytedance.com>,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, markver@us.ibm.com,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] virtio: write back features before verify
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2021 16:27:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878rz83lx0.fsf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211004083455-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
On Mon, Oct 04 2021, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 02:01:14PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 03 2021, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > @@ -160,6 +163,33 @@ \subsection{Legacy Interface: A Note on Feature
>> > Specification text within these sections generally does not apply
>> > to non-transitional devices.
>> >
>> > +\begin{note}
>> > +The device offers different features when used through
>> > +the legacy interface and when operated in accordance with this
>> > +specification.
>> > +\end{note}
>> > +
>> > +Transitional drivers MUST use Devices only through the legacy interface
>>
>> s/Devices only through the legacy interface/devices through the legacy
>> interface only/
>>
>> ?
>
> Both versions are actually confused, since how do you
> find out that device does not offer VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1?
>
> I think what this should really say is
>
> Transitional drivers MUST NOT accept VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 through
> the legacy interface.
Ok, that makes sense.
Would it make sense that transitional drivers MUST accept VERSION_1
through the non-legacy interface? Or is that redundant?
>
>
> Does linux actually satisfy this? Will it accept VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1
> through the legacy interface if offered?
I think that the Linux drivers will not operate on feature bit 32+ if
they are in legacy mode?
>>
>> Generally, looks good to me.
>
> Do we want to also add explanation that features can be
> changed until FEATURES_OK?
I always considered that to be implict, as feature negotiation is not
over until we have FEATURES_OK. Not sure whether we need an extra note.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-04 14:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-30 1:20 [RFC PATCH 1/1] virtio: write back features before verify Halil Pasic
2021-09-30 8:04 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-09-30 9:28 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-09-30 11:03 ` Halil Pasic
2021-09-30 11:31 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-01 14:22 ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-01 15:18 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-02 18:13 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-04 2:23 ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-04 9:07 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-05 10:06 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-05 10:43 ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-05 11:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-05 11:13 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-05 11:20 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-05 11:59 ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-05 15:25 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-04 7:01 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-04 9:25 ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-04 9:51 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-02 12:09 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-09-30 11:12 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-09-30 11:36 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-02 18:20 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-03 5:00 ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-03 6:42 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-03 7:26 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-04 12:01 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-04 12:54 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-04 14:27 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2021-10-04 15:05 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-04 15:45 ` [virtio-dev] " Cornelia Huck
2021-10-04 20:01 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-05 7:38 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-05 11:17 ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-05 11:22 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-05 15:20 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-01 7:21 ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-02 10:21 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-04 12:19 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-04 13:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-04 14:33 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-04 15:07 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-04 15:50 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-04 19:17 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-06 10:13 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-10-06 12:15 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-05 7:25 ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-05 7:53 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-05 10:46 ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-05 11:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-01 14:34 ` Christian Borntraeger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=878rz83lx0.fsf@redhat.com \
--to=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=markver@us.ibm.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=xieyongji@bytedance.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).