On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 02:45:40AM +0300, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
>
> On 8/2/2022 4:41 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> I feel some of my latest review opened some questions that I don't have
>
> good answers for and might have felt a bit rambling.
>
> So to focus the discussion:
> >
>
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 06:43:50PM +0300, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
> > > +A device can be a member of one or more device groups.
>
> Presumably this is so we can e.g. create subfunctions inside a VF.
>
> A VF now is a member of a SRIOV and SIOV type groups and we
>
> can use type to distinguish between these.
> >
>
> We should probably be explicit that each of these groups has to
>
> have a distinct group type then.
> >
>
> And this raises the question: different types have different
>
> capabilities. So let's say admin queue is used to both
>
> control features for SRIOV VFs and to create SIOV SFs.
>
> I guess we'll have a feature bit to say "command to create
>
> SIOV SFs is supported" but how do we say that this command
>
> is only supported for VFs not SFs?
> >
>
> Do we just make features list a superset of what is supported and simply
>
> say in the spec which commands are legal with which group types?
> >
> >
>
> Jason Cornelia what do you think?
> >
> >
> >
> > > +\item Self type (group identifier = 0) - this group has only one device in the group. Each virtio device is a member of at least one device group, the Self type group.
>
> Presumably, this is here so we can send commands that refer to the
>
> device itself as opposed to a group member (e.g. to
>
> PF as opposed to VF). Is that right?
> yes.
> >
>
> It's handy but again the problem here is, this refers to
>
> device as part of which group? Let's just drop this type?
>
> You suggested this type in our meeting. And this was one of the major
> changes from v5 --> v6.
Not just me but yes. I only just realized the problem we have with
device being part of multiple groups. Let's see what the fix is.
>
> How do you suggest sending admin commands to yourself ? the way I suggested
> in previous versions ?
I don't know yet. I am sorry I only saw this now.
> >
> >
