Re: [PATCH v1 0/8] virtio, vhost: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA support
On 3/8/24 8:28 AM, Lei Yang wrote: Hi Jonah QE tested this series v1 with a tap device with vhost=off with regression tests, everything works fine. And QE also add "notification_data=true" to the qemu command line then got "1" when performing the command [1] inside the guest. [1] cut -c39 /sys/devices/pci:00/:00:01.3/:05:00.0/virtio1/features Tested-by: Lei Yang Thank you for double-checking this series for me Lei! I appreciate it :) Jonah On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 7:18 PM Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 8:34 AM Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 08:07:31AM +0100, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 6:34 AM Jason Wang wrote: On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 3:46 AM Jonah Palmer wrote: The goal of these patches are to add support to a variety of virtio and vhost devices for the VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA transport feature. This feature indicates that a driver will pass extra data (instead of just a virtqueue's index) when notifying the corresponding device. The data passed in by the driver when this feature is enabled varies in format depending on if the device is using a split or packed virtqueue layout: Split VQ - Upper 16 bits: shadow_avail_idx - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index Packed VQ - Upper 16 bits: 1-bit wrap counter & 15-bit shadow_avail_idx - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index Also, due to the limitations of ioeventfd not being able to carry the extra provided by the driver, ioeventfd is left disabled for any devices using this feature. Is there any method to overcome this? This might help for vhost. As a half-baked idea, read(2)ing an eventfd descriptor returns an 8-byte integer already. The returned value of read depends on eventfd flags, but both have to do with the number of writes of the other end. My proposal is to replace this value with the last value written by the guest, so we can extract the virtio notification data from there. The behavior of read is similar to not-EFD_SEMAPHORE, reading a value and then blocking if read again without writes. The behavior of KVM writes is different, as it is not a counter anymore. Thanks! I doubt you will be able to support this in ioeventfd... I agree. But vhost does not really need the value at all. So why mask out ioeventfd with vhost? The interface should not be able to start with vhost-kernel because the feature is not offered by the vhost-kernel device. So ioeventfd is always enabled with vhost-kernel. Or do you mean we should allow it and let vhost-kernel fetch data from the avail ring as usual? I'm ok with that but then the guest can place any value to it, so the driver cannot be properly "validated by software" that way. vhost-vdpa is probably the only one that might need it... Right, but vhost-vdpa already supports doorbell memory regions so I guess it has little use, isn't it? Thanks! Thanks A significant aspect of this effort has been to maintain compatibility across different backends. As such, the feature is offered by backend devices only when supported, with fallback mechanisms where backend support is absent. Jonah Palmer (8): virtio/virtio-pci: Handle extra notification data virtio-pci: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA virtio-mmio: Handle extra notification data virtio-mmio: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA virtio-ccw: Handle extra notification data virtio-ccw: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA vhost/vhost-user: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA to vhost feature bits virtio: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA property definition hw/block/vhost-user-blk.c| 1 + hw/net/vhost_net.c | 2 ++ hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 16 hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c| 6 -- hw/scsi/vhost-scsi.c | 1 + hw/scsi/vhost-user-scsi.c| 1 + hw/virtio/vhost-user-fs.c| 2 +- hw/virtio/vhost-user-vsock.c | 1 + hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c | 15 +++ hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 16 +++- hw/virtio/virtio.c | 18 ++ include/hw/virtio/virtio.h | 5 - net/vhost-vdpa.c | 1 + 13 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) -- 2.39.3
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8] virtio, vhost: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA support
Hi Jonah QE tested this series v1 with a tap device with vhost=off with regression tests, everything works fine. And QE also add "notification_data=true" to the qemu command line then got "1" when performing the command [1] inside the guest. [1] cut -c39 /sys/devices/pci:00/:00:01.3/:05:00.0/virtio1/features Tested-by: Lei Yang On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 7:18 PM Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 8:34 AM Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 08:07:31AM +0100, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 6:34 AM Jason Wang wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 3:46 AM Jonah Palmer > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The goal of these patches are to add support to a variety of virtio > > > > > and > > > > > vhost devices for the VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA transport feature. > > > > > This > > > > > feature indicates that a driver will pass extra data (instead of just > > > > > a > > > > > virtqueue's index) when notifying the corresponding device. > > > > > > > > > > The data passed in by the driver when this feature is enabled varies > > > > > in > > > > > format depending on if the device is using a split or packed virtqueue > > > > > layout: > > > > > > > > > > Split VQ > > > > > - Upper 16 bits: shadow_avail_idx > > > > > - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index > > > > > > > > > > Packed VQ > > > > > - Upper 16 bits: 1-bit wrap counter & 15-bit shadow_avail_idx > > > > > - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index > > > > > > > > > > Also, due to the limitations of ioeventfd not being able to carry the > > > > > extra provided by the driver, ioeventfd is left disabled for any > > > > > devices > > > > > using this feature. > > > > > > > > Is there any method to overcome this? This might help for vhost. > > > > > > > > > > As a half-baked idea, read(2)ing an eventfd descriptor returns an > > > 8-byte integer already. The returned value of read depends on eventfd > > > flags, but both have to do with the number of writes of the other end. > > > > > > My proposal is to replace this value with the last value written by > > > the guest, so we can extract the virtio notification data from there. > > > The behavior of read is similar to not-EFD_SEMAPHORE, reading a value > > > and then blocking if read again without writes. The behavior of KVM > > > writes is different, as it is not a counter anymore. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > I doubt you will be able to support this in ioeventfd... > > I agree. > > > But vhost does not really need the value at all. > > So why mask out ioeventfd with vhost? > > The interface should not be able to start with vhost-kernel because > the feature is not offered by the vhost-kernel device. So ioeventfd is > always enabled with vhost-kernel. > > Or do you mean we should allow it and let vhost-kernel fetch data from > the avail ring as usual? I'm ok with that but then the guest can place > any value to it, so the driver cannot be properly "validated by > software" that way. > > > vhost-vdpa is probably the only one that might need it... > > Right, but vhost-vdpa already supports doorbell memory regions so I > guess it has little use, isn't it? > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A significant aspect of this effort has been to maintain compatibility > > > > > across different backends. As such, the feature is offered by backend > > > > > devices only when supported, with fallback mechanisms where backend > > > > > support is absent. > > > > > > > > > > Jonah Palmer (8): > > > > > virtio/virtio-pci: Handle extra notification data > > > > > virtio-pci: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > > > > virtio-mmio: Handle extra notification data > > > > > virtio-mmio: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > > > > virtio-ccw: Handle extra notification data > > > > > virtio-ccw: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > > > > vhost/vhost-user: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA to vhost feature > > > > > bits > > > > > virtio: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA property definition > > > > > > > > > > hw/block/vhost-user-blk.c| 1 + > > > > > hw/net/vhost_net.c | 2 ++ > > > > > hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 16 > > > > > hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c| 6 -- > > > > > hw/scsi/vhost-scsi.c | 1 + > > > > > hw/scsi/vhost-user-scsi.c| 1 + > > > > > hw/virtio/vhost-user-fs.c| 2 +- > > > > > hw/virtio/vhost-user-vsock.c | 1 + > > > > > hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c | 15 +++ > > > > > hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 16 +++- > > > > > hw/virtio/virtio.c | 18 ++ > > > > > include/hw/virtio/virtio.h | 5 - > > > > > net/vhost-vdpa.c | 1 + > > > > > 13 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > 2.39.3 > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8] virtio, vhost: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA support
On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 8:34 AM Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 08:07:31AM +0100, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 6:34 AM Jason Wang wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 3:46 AM Jonah Palmer > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > The goal of these patches are to add support to a variety of virtio and > > > > vhost devices for the VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA transport feature. This > > > > feature indicates that a driver will pass extra data (instead of just a > > > > virtqueue's index) when notifying the corresponding device. > > > > > > > > The data passed in by the driver when this feature is enabled varies in > > > > format depending on if the device is using a split or packed virtqueue > > > > layout: > > > > > > > > Split VQ > > > > - Upper 16 bits: shadow_avail_idx > > > > - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index > > > > > > > > Packed VQ > > > > - Upper 16 bits: 1-bit wrap counter & 15-bit shadow_avail_idx > > > > - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index > > > > > > > > Also, due to the limitations of ioeventfd not being able to carry the > > > > extra provided by the driver, ioeventfd is left disabled for any devices > > > > using this feature. > > > > > > Is there any method to overcome this? This might help for vhost. > > > > > > > As a half-baked idea, read(2)ing an eventfd descriptor returns an > > 8-byte integer already. The returned value of read depends on eventfd > > flags, but both have to do with the number of writes of the other end. > > > > My proposal is to replace this value with the last value written by > > the guest, so we can extract the virtio notification data from there. > > The behavior of read is similar to not-EFD_SEMAPHORE, reading a value > > and then blocking if read again without writes. The behavior of KVM > > writes is different, as it is not a counter anymore. > > > > Thanks! > > > I doubt you will be able to support this in ioeventfd... I agree. > But vhost does not really need the value at all. > So why mask out ioeventfd with vhost? The interface should not be able to start with vhost-kernel because the feature is not offered by the vhost-kernel device. So ioeventfd is always enabled with vhost-kernel. Or do you mean we should allow it and let vhost-kernel fetch data from the avail ring as usual? I'm ok with that but then the guest can place any value to it, so the driver cannot be properly "validated by software" that way. > vhost-vdpa is probably the only one that might need it... Right, but vhost-vdpa already supports doorbell memory regions so I guess it has little use, isn't it? Thanks! > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > A significant aspect of this effort has been to maintain compatibility > > > > across different backends. As such, the feature is offered by backend > > > > devices only when supported, with fallback mechanisms where backend > > > > support is absent. > > > > > > > > Jonah Palmer (8): > > > > virtio/virtio-pci: Handle extra notification data > > > > virtio-pci: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > > > virtio-mmio: Handle extra notification data > > > > virtio-mmio: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > > > virtio-ccw: Handle extra notification data > > > > virtio-ccw: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > > > vhost/vhost-user: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA to vhost feature bits > > > > virtio: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA property definition > > > > > > > > hw/block/vhost-user-blk.c| 1 + > > > > hw/net/vhost_net.c | 2 ++ > > > > hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 16 > > > > hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c| 6 -- > > > > hw/scsi/vhost-scsi.c | 1 + > > > > hw/scsi/vhost-user-scsi.c| 1 + > > > > hw/virtio/vhost-user-fs.c| 2 +- > > > > hw/virtio/vhost-user-vsock.c | 1 + > > > > hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c | 15 +++ > > > > hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 16 +++- > > > > hw/virtio/virtio.c | 18 ++ > > > > include/hw/virtio/virtio.h | 5 - > > > > net/vhost-vdpa.c | 1 + > > > > 13 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 2.39.3 > > > > > > > >
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8] virtio,vhost: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA support
On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 08:07:31AM +0100, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: > On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 6:34 AM Jason Wang wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 3:46 AM Jonah Palmer wrote: > > > > > > The goal of these patches are to add support to a variety of virtio and > > > vhost devices for the VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA transport feature. This > > > feature indicates that a driver will pass extra data (instead of just a > > > virtqueue's index) when notifying the corresponding device. > > > > > > The data passed in by the driver when this feature is enabled varies in > > > format depending on if the device is using a split or packed virtqueue > > > layout: > > > > > > Split VQ > > > - Upper 16 bits: shadow_avail_idx > > > - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index > > > > > > Packed VQ > > > - Upper 16 bits: 1-bit wrap counter & 15-bit shadow_avail_idx > > > - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index > > > > > > Also, due to the limitations of ioeventfd not being able to carry the > > > extra provided by the driver, ioeventfd is left disabled for any devices > > > using this feature. > > > > Is there any method to overcome this? This might help for vhost. > > > > As a half-baked idea, read(2)ing an eventfd descriptor returns an > 8-byte integer already. The returned value of read depends on eventfd > flags, but both have to do with the number of writes of the other end. > > My proposal is to replace this value with the last value written by > the guest, so we can extract the virtio notification data from there. > The behavior of read is similar to not-EFD_SEMAPHORE, reading a value > and then blocking if read again without writes. The behavior of KVM > writes is different, as it is not a counter anymore. > > Thanks! I doubt you will be able to support this in ioeventfd... But vhost does not really need the value at all. So why mask out ioeventfd with vhost? vhost-vdpa is probably the only one that might need it... > > Thanks > > > > > > > > A significant aspect of this effort has been to maintain compatibility > > > across different backends. As such, the feature is offered by backend > > > devices only when supported, with fallback mechanisms where backend > > > support is absent. > > > > > > Jonah Palmer (8): > > > virtio/virtio-pci: Handle extra notification data > > > virtio-pci: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > > virtio-mmio: Handle extra notification data > > > virtio-mmio: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > > virtio-ccw: Handle extra notification data > > > virtio-ccw: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > > vhost/vhost-user: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA to vhost feature bits > > > virtio: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA property definition > > > > > > hw/block/vhost-user-blk.c| 1 + > > > hw/net/vhost_net.c | 2 ++ > > > hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 16 > > > hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c| 6 -- > > > hw/scsi/vhost-scsi.c | 1 + > > > hw/scsi/vhost-user-scsi.c| 1 + > > > hw/virtio/vhost-user-fs.c| 2 +- > > > hw/virtio/vhost-user-vsock.c | 1 + > > > hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c | 15 +++ > > > hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 16 +++- > > > hw/virtio/virtio.c | 18 ++ > > > include/hw/virtio/virtio.h | 5 - > > > net/vhost-vdpa.c | 1 + > > > 13 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > > > > > -- > > > 2.39.3 > > > > >
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8] virtio, vhost: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA support
On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 6:34 AM Jason Wang wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 3:46 AM Jonah Palmer wrote: > > > > The goal of these patches are to add support to a variety of virtio and > > vhost devices for the VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA transport feature. This > > feature indicates that a driver will pass extra data (instead of just a > > virtqueue's index) when notifying the corresponding device. > > > > The data passed in by the driver when this feature is enabled varies in > > format depending on if the device is using a split or packed virtqueue > > layout: > > > > Split VQ > > - Upper 16 bits: shadow_avail_idx > > - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index > > > > Packed VQ > > - Upper 16 bits: 1-bit wrap counter & 15-bit shadow_avail_idx > > - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index > > > > Also, due to the limitations of ioeventfd not being able to carry the > > extra provided by the driver, ioeventfd is left disabled for any devices > > using this feature. > > Is there any method to overcome this? This might help for vhost. > As a half-baked idea, read(2)ing an eventfd descriptor returns an 8-byte integer already. The returned value of read depends on eventfd flags, but both have to do with the number of writes of the other end. My proposal is to replace this value with the last value written by the guest, so we can extract the virtio notification data from there. The behavior of read is similar to not-EFD_SEMAPHORE, reading a value and then blocking if read again without writes. The behavior of KVM writes is different, as it is not a counter anymore. Thanks! > Thanks > > > > > A significant aspect of this effort has been to maintain compatibility > > across different backends. As such, the feature is offered by backend > > devices only when supported, with fallback mechanisms where backend > > support is absent. > > > > Jonah Palmer (8): > > virtio/virtio-pci: Handle extra notification data > > virtio-pci: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > virtio-mmio: Handle extra notification data > > virtio-mmio: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > virtio-ccw: Handle extra notification data > > virtio-ccw: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > > vhost/vhost-user: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA to vhost feature bits > > virtio: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA property definition > > > > hw/block/vhost-user-blk.c| 1 + > > hw/net/vhost_net.c | 2 ++ > > hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 16 > > hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c| 6 -- > > hw/scsi/vhost-scsi.c | 1 + > > hw/scsi/vhost-user-scsi.c| 1 + > > hw/virtio/vhost-user-fs.c| 2 +- > > hw/virtio/vhost-user-vsock.c | 1 + > > hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c | 15 +++ > > hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 16 +++- > > hw/virtio/virtio.c | 18 ++ > > include/hw/virtio/virtio.h | 5 - > > net/vhost-vdpa.c | 1 + > > 13 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > 2.39.3 > > >
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8] virtio, vhost: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA support
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 3:46 AM Jonah Palmer wrote: > > The goal of these patches are to add support to a variety of virtio and > vhost devices for the VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA transport feature. This > feature indicates that a driver will pass extra data (instead of just a > virtqueue's index) when notifying the corresponding device. > > The data passed in by the driver when this feature is enabled varies in > format depending on if the device is using a split or packed virtqueue > layout: > > Split VQ > - Upper 16 bits: shadow_avail_idx > - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index > > Packed VQ > - Upper 16 bits: 1-bit wrap counter & 15-bit shadow_avail_idx > - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index > > Also, due to the limitations of ioeventfd not being able to carry the > extra provided by the driver, ioeventfd is left disabled for any devices > using this feature. Is there any method to overcome this? This might help for vhost. Thanks > > A significant aspect of this effort has been to maintain compatibility > across different backends. As such, the feature is offered by backend > devices only when supported, with fallback mechanisms where backend > support is absent. > > Jonah Palmer (8): > virtio/virtio-pci: Handle extra notification data > virtio-pci: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > virtio-mmio: Handle extra notification data > virtio-mmio: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > virtio-ccw: Handle extra notification data > virtio-ccw: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA > vhost/vhost-user: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA to vhost feature bits > virtio: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA property definition > > hw/block/vhost-user-blk.c| 1 + > hw/net/vhost_net.c | 2 ++ > hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 16 > hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c| 6 -- > hw/scsi/vhost-scsi.c | 1 + > hw/scsi/vhost-user-scsi.c| 1 + > hw/virtio/vhost-user-fs.c| 2 +- > hw/virtio/vhost-user-vsock.c | 1 + > hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c | 15 +++ > hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 16 +++- > hw/virtio/virtio.c | 18 ++ > include/hw/virtio/virtio.h | 5 - > net/vhost-vdpa.c | 1 + > 13 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.39.3 >
[PATCH v1 0/8] virtio,vhost: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA support
The goal of these patches are to add support to a variety of virtio and vhost devices for the VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA transport feature. This feature indicates that a driver will pass extra data (instead of just a virtqueue's index) when notifying the corresponding device. The data passed in by the driver when this feature is enabled varies in format depending on if the device is using a split or packed virtqueue layout: Split VQ - Upper 16 bits: shadow_avail_idx - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index Packed VQ - Upper 16 bits: 1-bit wrap counter & 15-bit shadow_avail_idx - Lower 16 bits: virtqueue index Also, due to the limitations of ioeventfd not being able to carry the extra provided by the driver, ioeventfd is left disabled for any devices using this feature. A significant aspect of this effort has been to maintain compatibility across different backends. As such, the feature is offered by backend devices only when supported, with fallback mechanisms where backend support is absent. Jonah Palmer (8): virtio/virtio-pci: Handle extra notification data virtio-pci: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA virtio-mmio: Handle extra notification data virtio-mmio: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA virtio-ccw: Handle extra notification data virtio-ccw: Lock ioeventfd state with VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA vhost/vhost-user: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA to vhost feature bits virtio: Add VIRTIO_F_NOTIFICATION_DATA property definition hw/block/vhost-user-blk.c| 1 + hw/net/vhost_net.c | 2 ++ hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 16 hw/s390x/virtio-ccw.c| 6 -- hw/scsi/vhost-scsi.c | 1 + hw/scsi/vhost-user-scsi.c| 1 + hw/virtio/vhost-user-fs.c| 2 +- hw/virtio/vhost-user-vsock.c | 1 + hw/virtio/virtio-mmio.c | 15 +++ hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c | 16 +++- hw/virtio/virtio.c | 18 ++ include/hw/virtio/virtio.h | 5 - net/vhost-vdpa.c | 1 + 13 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) -- 2.39.3
