Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: 2Kg3w7YnkMxgZYvUKucTGMKGT2XDhBq/6VCOXvm7zt9XqVPjmIERt7+cWx2Nt/4N/4aJEllBnA
 gT3FUhxjs5sg==
IronPort-SDR: kfxF4FwPksoR+4MIAykhuN88Y7X4M9VqYkWzYl6gUP6laeWOL0/X6Ub9CNTU7b3oTZawHAtKwE
 nwx4MZjzznzA==
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] vDPA/ifcvf: enable Intel C5000X-PL virtio-block for
 vDPA
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
        Zhu Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@intel.com>, mst@redhat.com,
        lulu@redhat.com, leonro@nvidia.com
Cc:     virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20210414091832.5132-1-lingshan.zhu@intel.com>
 <20210414091832.5132-3-lingshan.zhu@intel.com>
 <54839b05-78d2-8edf-317c-372f0ecda024@redhat.com>
 <1a1f9f50-dc92-ced3-759d-e600abca3138@linux.intel.com>
 <c90a923f-7c8d-9a32-ce14-2370f85f1ba4@redhat.com>
 <10700088-3358-739b-5770-612ab761598c@linux.intel.com>
 <d6b27f59-ff17-1d63-0065-fd03ee36cd2d@redhat.com>
From:   Zhu Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <af2bb5e6-e690-1aa6-4be3-75a18750aeb4@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Apr 2021 15:23:38 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <d6b27f59-ff17-1d63-0065-fd03ee36cd2d@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Precedence: bulk


On 4/15/2021 3:17 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> 在 2021/4/15 下午2:41, Zhu Lingshan 写道:
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we've discussed this sometime in the past but what's the 
>>>>> reason for such whitelist consider there's already a 
>>>>> get_features() implemention?
>>>>>
>>>>> E.g Any reason to block VIRTIO_BLK_F_WRITE_ZEROS or 
>>>>> VIRTIO_F_RING_PACKED?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>> The reason is some feature bits are supported in the device but not 
>>>> supported by the driver, e.g, for virtio-net, mq & cq 
>>>> implementation is not ready in the driver.
>>>
>>>
>>> I understand the case of virtio-net but I wonder why we need this 
>>> for block where we don't vq cvq.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>> This is still a subset of the feature bits read from hardware, I 
>> leave it here to code consistently, and indicate what we support 
>> clearly.
>> Are you suggesting remove this feature bits list and just use what we 
>> read from hardware?
>>
>> Thansk 
>
>
> Yes, please do that.
>
> The whiltelist doesn't help in this case I think.
OK, will remove this in V2

Thanks
>
> Thanks