> From: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2023 7:56 AM > > On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 10:12:59PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote: > > Rolling v4 now. > > Great thanks! I think the result will be in a good shape from the ABI point of > view. Good job! > Thanks.
> I think so far Jason was the only one with significant comments on the series > so > let's see what he says. > > From my personal POV what will be left to do to get this feature ready for > merging would be > > - tightening the language: > - thinking of and addressing all kind of corner cases. > > > Since by now from our email discussions I have I think a decent understanding > of how the feature is supposed to work I understand how these things work but > I > think there are still things that would be a bit unclear for an unprepared > reader. > Many aspects are covered in the cover letter. > Just to give a random example, there's no explicit time where the member kind > of switches to the legacy/back to modern mode. I am guessing setting DRIVER > bit through legacy interface does this. We'll want to list that. > Switch between the two is the same as today how a transitional device accesses both the register space. Hypervisor level vfio tiny stub driver is not involved in such switchover as today. > I'll try to help find these issues and maybe even suggest wording. > Sure. That will be great. > I've delayed commenting on these until the high level design is agreed on, > didn't want to make you waste time on polishing as the patches undergo > significant changes, and I suggest you do the same in v4: let's make sure > there's > a wide agreement on the ABI then focus on the spec language. I agree, now that we agree on the design and ABI, lets polish above aspects you told in v4. I posted v4. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
