On 06/19/2017 03:46 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
What do you have in mind about the protocol flag?
Merely this: older clients might be confused if they get
a s/g with 1024 entries.
I don't disagree to add that. But the client (i.e. vhost-user
slave) is a host userspace program, and it seems that users can
easily patch their host side applications if there is any issue,
maybe we also don't need to be too prudent about that, do we?
I won't insist on this but it might not be easy. For example, are there
clients that want to forward the packet to host kernel as a s/g?
Not sure about all the client implementation, but it sounds like a
strange and inefficient usage of vhost-user to pass packets to
the host kernel, given vhost kernel backend is already there
for the usage.