Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 05:30:48PM CET, wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 06 2023, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 01:29:30PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 02:04:48PM CET, wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>TODO (maybe?) - probably ok to defer until this part is upstream:
>>> >
>>>
> Add "all members" member id.
>>> >
>>>
> Add commands for MSI, feature discovery.
>>> >
>>>
> Add commands for transport vq.
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>My intent is to try and support both SR-IOV and SIOV
>>>
>usecases with the same structure and maybe even the same
>>>
>VQ.
>>>
>>> Sorry to be late to the party, I'm trying to catch up. Is it common to
>>> have cover letter for features this brief? I mean, from the cover
>>> letter, I'm totally unable to understand what you are introducing here.
>>>
>>> Could you elaborate about what you are aiming to achive with this?
>>> Could you shed some usecases perhaps?
>>>
>>> I have to be missing something obvious, but I don't get why any notion
>>> of SR-IOV could be beneficial for virtio.
>>>
>>
>> Good point, I'll add a bit of motivation.
>>
>> For SR-IOV, it is not unusual for PFs to excercise control over VFs.
>> There is interest in the community to include an interface to allow this
>> in the virtio spec, when the PF is a virtio device. This is what this
>> patch does.
>
>Unfortunately, information in the cover letter does not make it into
>git -- should things like that go into the github issue (and into the
Why's that? Can't you have a merge commit to include the cover letter,
as we have it in netdev for example?
>ballot?) It's useful both for reviewing (cover letter) and understanding
>the rationale later (github/ballot).
>
