On 12/13/17 11:24, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 13/12/2017 11:11, Maxime Coquelin wrote: >>> Hi Maxime, >>> >>> I think this series is wrong from the virtio spec's point of view. If >>> the driver requests VIRTIO_NET_F_MQ, that does not mean "the driver >>> knows about multiqueue", it only means that "the driver wants to read >>> max_virtqueue_pairs" from configuration space. >> >> Actually, my series fixes half of the problem, the case where driver >> does not know about multiqueue. >> >> In this case, there is no point in the backend to wait for the >> initialization of queues that does not exist. >> >> So I think my series is not enough, but not wrong. > > You're right; what I meant by "wrong" is that it becomes unnecessary if > you do VIRTIO_NET_CTRL_MQ_VQ_PAIRS_SET. But since this requires a > vhost-user update, doing both makes sense.
Based on this, plus reviewing patch #4 for: + vq = dev->virtqueue[--dev->nr_vring]; + if (!vq) + continue; + + dev->virtqueue[dev->nr_vring] = NULL; Acked-by: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> Thanks Laszlo
