Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:d5a5:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id gn37csp4069377pxb; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 16:43:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzL18RXbcBWWZv5t50WKg0Zs7lYPB5Uj+uI/Aau4k/xI8aB6j9W9fiqSdpssbYU2Atwlsr8 X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8b86:b0:13d:d600:789f with SMTP id ay6-20020a1709028b8600b0013dd600789fmr2145304plb.73.1633391013838; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 16:43:33 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1633391013; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=CHPekZg1L/QNjqvFCz46p0Xxac9EgJpRVbRcsTrBzBNCez4ezkijWi/X9d32LrK+bx Zq02km3WekjFpSf23SRI5yoJF5mRy7HAZynKoxW6Qx9l+ayQP9O5YQC4f8QDf6jSGuMD n8zpXsBJi+DYC8OCS9Aa5j0Sl7MMYGpzKIRjzqyKostkWAiqPaPwJ8vdReEOzK6E/HT4 1Tnted6B0nkgw6Lnjfm300qvjFzskbudrkm5UX0VrXyg3AB/zEoT+OdwxonnyZ2mxvlU XSew2c+UYnDrSdR4hGFR7cJCqoV9BWeQW9UvaztID+SugfbI+cA0AGu//VPjQiwExTnJ wOAw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=KsdJcxDdgTF/zmQf/6TyWls50jhunD8gsTgc9KR7gmk=; b=Zgv99TtXmgjPp16RXOdelVl9on3AgICs8mfBUjcDl5v02PfLGQ/6gH40FEWGik/bIG 7LsNb3JpkZM8+kasiI7Vs1g/+9Mm2Mp1NPKljoCtqLwxFfZH/tmatDdM37gZ/1stSh2K K0oSVeeD6AQAg9dwS8+Y8lIy7lgAZ67Kbg527uLMIoWZiFQ5Dfn3mv29Jaafmopxw5Jq VEh3N4D/jXKApuulz4bLPkkhp5TAf9iritZtWwoPqAqxUuoT39syVF3QRD7Z3wUSks9Z 1olgf2K6tbt9Dph4JjTasyPWZ8AccEdl9v8kJ4MH38gdj0PqWDebu/JahgqZ9OIXiftq WGJQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=I5jPMqbV; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p19si9083080pfo.216.2021.10.04.16.43.20; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 16:43:33 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=I5jPMqbV; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234442AbhJDUDO (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 4 Oct 2021 16:03:14 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:44359 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235674AbhJDUDL (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Oct 2021 16:03:11 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1633377681; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=KsdJcxDdgTF/zmQf/6TyWls50jhunD8gsTgc9KR7gmk=; b=I5jPMqbV0kwAr7vgIY294MShGNApyLTO5OGdypc8T40AV3COJxjZpqsig53hGTreJ3Biw8 uNbPln8GF7WZuE0YF2NvMKNXYmziy+R1xf5KbuLNvbdoWiGy0htushFMYz/YfjBRt8LSqV lPPT2kLYz10GUKjqrzE25VdQ6lOAzik= Received: from mail-ed1-f70.google.com (mail-ed1-f70.google.com [209.85.208.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-190-dXYKWs-3PeSLuHHb7ciOnQ-1; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 16:01:19 -0400 X-MC-Unique: dXYKWs-3PeSLuHHb7ciOnQ-1 Received: by mail-ed1-f70.google.com with SMTP id g28-20020a50d0dc000000b003dae69dfe3aso5513574edf.7 for ; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 13:01:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=KsdJcxDdgTF/zmQf/6TyWls50jhunD8gsTgc9KR7gmk=; b=jmt03cD8lh/evh8dOJ9BJdkXCTCgR5OiBZwVijLdw3CaQ6WLR9zcECYdSGfT/J8Pus FLizZyTNPiqoXm+KJ94tadfYLlKKO33Pk0wgGtfBzpCxPAOhNFFkrjtOW2s9LM0rVXT4 2hHxcqyscEQJgLzAJAMJ2LbzC0cNeOfbHXZjo2DYTP/O6dWSKqs+IVcIjbZT4/i6/cFK SaXf1XT5tgB2ky/TWEfxizwVQU+1/384FaiEKvjVVK7jCpIABN44AZwFNLdUkOR0ICat 1yNN3Vefkj2DCUsZk0mO84wTWZIko6GyT14EPHkJiCdqJda9OKntPQmJL+F8YPDBo026 3R0Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533iqIcf3NeQlC+FMfIcwcdg4ZeGOTHofYoUUymOlPYpErRKPELs r6ElA/r34vfO1nvokI0ECKpG7lKHIK+d6b1mEZpmSwT73Ff426eQNu/VMxEKk2fNpqGzVlu4gba X/Vtu523IXZHl0Wr4tef8yiiy X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:2906:: with SMTP id ee6mr17966514edb.170.1633377678170; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 13:01:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:2906:: with SMTP id ee6mr17966483edb.170.1633377677943; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 13:01:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com ([2.55.147.134]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z8sm6874865ejd.94.2021.10.04.13.01.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 04 Oct 2021 13:01:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 16:01:12 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Cornelia Huck Cc: Halil Pasic , Jason Wang , Xie Yongji , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, markver@us.ibm.com, Christian Borntraeger , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] virtio: write back features before verify Message-ID: <20211004160005-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <87fstm47no.fsf@redhat.com> <20211002141351-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20211003070030.658fc94e.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20211003021027-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20211003032253-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <87ee912e45.fsf@redhat.com> <20211004083455-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <878rz83lx0.fsf@redhat.com> <20211004110152-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <87zgro23r1.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87zgro23r1.fsf@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 05:45:06PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Mon, Oct 04 2021, "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 04:27:23PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 04 2021, "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 02:01:14PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >> >> On Sun, Oct 03 2021, "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > >> >> > @@ -160,6 +163,33 @@ \subsection{Legacy Interface: A Note on Feature > >> >> > Specification text within these sections generally does not apply > >> >> > to non-transitional devices. > >> >> > > >> >> > +\begin{note} > >> >> > +The device offers different features when used through > >> >> > +the legacy interface and when operated in accordance with this > >> >> > +specification. > >> >> > +\end{note} > >> >> > + > >> >> > +Transitional drivers MUST use Devices only through the legacy interface > >> >> > >> >> s/Devices only through the legacy interface/devices through the legacy > >> >> interface only/ > >> >> > >> >> ? > >> > > >> > Both versions are actually confused, since how do you > >> > find out that device does not offer VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1? > >> > > >> > I think what this should really say is > >> > > >> > Transitional drivers MUST NOT accept VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 through > >> > the legacy interface. > >> > >> Ok, that makes sense. > >> > >> Would it make sense that transitional drivers MUST accept VERSION_1 > >> through the non-legacy interface? Or is that redundant? > > > > We already have: > > > > A driver MUST accept VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 if it is offered. > > Yep, so it is redundant. > > > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > Does linux actually satisfy this? Will it accept VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 > >> > through the legacy interface if offered? > >> > >> I think that the Linux drivers will not operate on feature bit 32+ if > >> they are in legacy mode? > > > > > > Well ... with PCI there's no *way* for host to set bit 32 through > > legacy. But it might be possible with MMIO/CCW. Can you tell me > > what happens then? > > ccw does not support accessing bit 32+, either. Not sure about mmio. > > > > > > >> >> > >> >> Generally, looks good to me. > >> > > >> > Do we want to also add explanation that features can be > >> > changed until FEATURES_OK? > >> > >> I always considered that to be implict, as feature negotiation is not > >> over until we have FEATURES_OK. Not sure whether we need an extra note. > > > > Well Halil here says once you set a feature bit you can't clear it. > > So maybe not ... > > Ok, so what about something like > > "If FEATURES_OK is not set, the driver MAY change the set of features it > accepts." > > in the device initialization section? Maybe "as long as". However Halil implied that some features are not turned off properly if that happens. Halil could you pls provide some examples? -- MST