On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 11:55 AM Parav Pandit <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2022 8:11 PM > > > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 11:39:15AM +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote: > > > +Regardless of device offering VIRTIO_F_IN_ORDER, admin queue command > > > +buffers are used by the device in out of order manner. > > > > Instead of special-casing AQ I'd like to see a generic capability > > addressing this > > need. For example, TX for virtio net might benefit from this too. And I'd > > like to > > mention, again, VIRTIO_F_PARTIAL_ORDER proposal as one, arguably cleaner > > and more generic way to address this. > > And if that's not adequate I'd like to address that as part of the > > PARTIAL_ORDER proposal, this kind of per-queue in order was definitely on > > the radar as it was formulated. > As we dropped other less important items from this proposal because it was > too big. > I am going to keep the PARTIAL_ORDER also out of this one. It falls in same > bucket. > > So AQ follows same ordering rules as other queues. > Are you ok with this in v3?
I'm fine with this. Thanks > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
