Re: [PATCHv3 RFC] virtio-pci: flexible configuration layout
From: Rusty Russell <hidden>
Date: 2011-11-24 02:29:42
Also in:
kvm, lkml
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:38:40 +0200, Sasha Levin [off-list ref] wrote:
On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 10:49 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:quoted
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 01:02:22PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:quoted
+/* Fields in VIRTIO_PCI_CAP_COMMON_CFG: */ +struct virtio_pci_common_cfg { + /* About the whole device. */ + __u64 device_features; /* read-only */ + __u64 guest_features; /* read-write */We currently require atomic accesses to common fields. Some architectures might not have such for 64 bit, so these need to be split I think ...We can consider stealing the feature implementation from virtio-mmio: Use the first 32 bits as a selector and the last as the features themselves. It's more complex to work with, but it provides 2**32 32 feature bits (which should be enough for a while) and it solves the atomic access issue.
That works. I don't expect we'll need more than 64 features given that virtio_net hasn't seen a new one in over a year, but it's gone from 5 to 18 in 4 years, so another 32 bits at that rate only gets us another decade. Unfortunately, it doesn't solve the queue_address problem. We currently multiply the (32-bit) address by 4096 (the alignment). If drivers are going to reduce alignment, that makes it trickier, hence the change here to a 64. Simplicity. We could cheat and assert that a 32-bit write there implies 0 in the upper bits, and hope that all 64 bit platforms can do a 64-bit atomic write. Or insist the value not be intepreted until the guest writes its (first) feature bit. Perhaps we really need a "I'm done configuring!" trigger, now we can't use the feature bit field for that. Thoughts welcome... Rusty.