Michael S. Tsirkin
2015-Apr-01 09:43 UTC
[PATCH v2 1/6] virtio_balloon: transitional interface
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 07:53:14PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> writes: > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:17:23PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > >> I would leave the device *exactly* as is, ugly structure packing and > >> all. > > > > But why? It's going to be used for years, might as well make it clean? > > Because the only spec which currently exists says to do that.OK but the only spec which currently exists also says it's a legacy only device, so driver must not set VERSION_1. So surely, we can make minor changes when VERSION_1 is set, like we did for other devices. Let me post the latest patches I'm working on, see what you think then.> We do > need a new virtio memballoon spec, but it'll look nothing like this > anyway. > > Cheers, > Rusty.I think it's going to have significantly different semantics, too, so not much value in making that one work with current drivers, right? -- MST
On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 11:43:46 +0200 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote:> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 07:53:14PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> writes: > > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:17:23PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > >> I would leave the device *exactly* as is, ugly structure packing and > > >> all. > > > > > > But why? It's going to be used for years, might as well make it clean? > > > > Because the only spec which currently exists says to do that. > > OK but the only spec which currently exists also says it's a legacy only > device, so driver must not set VERSION_1. So surely, we can make minor > changes when VERSION_1 is set, like we did for other devices.But we don't plan to replace the other devices, so it makes sense to do some changes for 1.0.> > Let me post the latest patches I'm working on, > see what you think then. > > > We do > > need a new virtio memballoon spec, but it'll look nothing like this > > anyway. > > > > Cheers, > > Rusty. > > I think it's going to have significantly different semantics, too, > so not much value in making that one work with current > drivers, right? >So why not just keep virtio-balloon as-is and just specify endianness etc. for 1.0? Keeps the old drivers going without hacks, and we can start with a fresh driver for the new virtio-balloon.
Michael S. Tsirkin
2015-Apr-01 10:28 UTC
[PATCH v2 1/6] virtio_balloon: transitional interface
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 12:22:44PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:> On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 11:43:46 +0200 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 07:53:14PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> writes: > > > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:17:23PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > >> I would leave the device *exactly* as is, ugly structure packing and > > > >> all. > > > > > > > > But why? It's going to be used for years, might as well make it clean? > > > > > > Because the only spec which currently exists says to do that. > > > > OK but the only spec which currently exists also says it's a legacy only > > device, so driver must not set VERSION_1. So surely, we can make minor > > changes when VERSION_1 is set, like we did for other devices. > > But we don't plan to replace the other devices, so it makes sense to do > some changes for 1.0.I'm not sure what the above says. Do you agree with making minor changes in device behaviour? Also to be clear, I think this is 1.1 material.> > > > Let me post the latest patches I'm working on, > > see what you think then. > > > > > We do > > > need a new virtio memballoon spec, but it'll look nothing like this > > > anyway. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Rusty. > > > > I think it's going to have significantly different semantics, too, > > so not much value in making that one work with current > > drivers, right? > > > > So why not just keep virtio-balloon as-is and just specify endianness > etc. for 1.0? Keeps the old drivers going without hacks, > and we can > start with a fresh driver for the new virtio-balloon.Well it doesn't really, we need cpu_to_virtio in a bunch of places anyway. So I kind of prefer making it clean, even just to avoid setting a bad example for other devices. Let me post the new patch where it's all fixed in a cleaner way, and everyone can discuss whether it's too much work. -- MST
Possibly Parallel Threads
- [PATCH v2 1/6] virtio_balloon: transitional interface
- [PATCH v2 1/6] virtio_balloon: transitional interface
- [PATCH v2 1/6] virtio_balloon: transitional interface
- [PATCH v2 1/6] virtio_balloon: transitional interface
- [PATCH v2 1/6] virtio_balloon: transitional interface