On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 12:16:47PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > We also need > > - something like injecting cvq commands to control rx mode from the admin > > device > > - page fault / dirty page handling > > > > these two seem to call for a vq. > > Right, but vq is not necessarily for PF if we had PASID. And with > PASID we don't even need a dedicated new cvq.
I don't think it's a good idea to mix transactions from multiple PASIDs on the same vq. Attaching a PASID to a queue seems more reasonable. cvq is under guest control, so yes I think a separate vq is preferable. What is true is that with subfunctions you would have PASID per subfunction and then one subfunction for control. I think a sketch of how things will work with scalable iov can't hurt as part of this proposal. And, I'm not sure we should have so much flexibility: if there's an interface that works for SRIOV and SIOV then that seems preferable than having distinct transports for SRIOV and SIOV. -- MST --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
