Hi Xie, (2014/11/10 17:07), Xie, Huawei wrote: > Here all layer 2 implementations are required to return same type of > vhost_net_device_ops function pointers to > layer 1, so layer 1 need to do some kind of preprocessing of its message or > wrap some private message ctx in like vhost_device_ctx, > and then pass the message to layer2. > But as we have a more common layer 3, virtio-net layer, how about we put > common message handler in virtio net layer as much as possible, > and different layer 2 only do the local message preprocessing, and then pass > common message format to layer 3? > I think we at least need to define functional pointers between layer 2 and > layer 3. > Layer 1 and layer 2 actually are sub layers of the same layer. It is that > layer(cuse/user) implementation's choice whether to provide an interface > between > them, and the interface could be different in terms of function prototype. > Let us say we are to implement a new vhost, I only care the common interface > provided by layer 3. I don't want to register another callbacks for my driver > which > are used by myself only. > Let us think more about this. With my RFC implementation, sometimes Layer1 directly calls Layer2-a or Layer2-b functions. It may be fast a bit, but may not be well abstracted because Layer1 doesn't call virtio common layer sometimes.
Anyway, I guess it's nice to change implementation as you mentioned. We don't need speed while initialization. Let's take well abstracted implementation. Thanks, Tetsuya
