> > > Yes, sure, we need to exactly specify the different kinds of file > > > handles / resources. I think it makes sense to have a virtio feature > > > flag for each of them, so guest+host can easily negotiate what they are > > > able to handle and what not. > > > > I was expecting that to be a feature of the resource producers > > (virtio-gpu, virtio-fs, ...) rather than a feature of virtio-ipc > > itself. > > "resources from other virtio devices" would be one virtio-ipc feature > flag. And, yes, that would for the most part have the other device > handle the problem. > > But there also is "unix socket", or maybe a somewhat broader "stream", > which would be another feature flag I guess because virtio-ipc would > just tunnel the stream without the help from other devices.
Can you elaborate on what you mean by this? I can envision how virtio-ipc would be a generic mechanism for passing data+virtio resources, including any new types of resources it itself defines. However, if "unix sockets" or a generic "stream" expands beyond virtio, that seems too broad, with too many edge cases to be feasible to implement. -David --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
