> Why not directly putting 9P links into virtio devices ?
We have thought about using files to represent properties, but it turns out we may need to subscribe to a large amount of
properties, so opening all of those files and polling is not ideal. Also the cross-property time-order matters in our case, so we abandoned this idea.
On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 3:50 AM Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <> wrote:
On 02.06.21 22:09, Hao Chen wrote:
> We can use any protocol to implement this, and publish it somewhere, but it
> does not carry the same weight as putting it in the virtio spec. It is
> easier to say
> "we use virtio, and for this device we use virtio-xxx device", but it
> would be weird to
> say "we use virtio, but for this device, we use vsock+some other non-standard
> protocol, please support this or you will break the compatibility".
Why not directly putting 9P links into virtio devices ?
In both cases we still have the problem knowing the actual meaning of
the individual parameters. Not so different from some raw IO space
(just a bit easier to parse).
I believe we need some layer above for describing the actual meanings.
--mtx
--
---
Hinweis: unverschlÃsselte E-Mails kÃnnen leicht abgehÃrt und manipuliert
werden ! FÃr eine vertrauliche Kommunikation senden Sie bitte ihren
GPG/PGP-SchlÃssel zu.
---
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
-- +49-151-27565287
