> From: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com>
> Sent: 22 August 2025 06:34 PM
>
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 12:22:50PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com>
> > > Sent: 22 August 2025 03:52 PM
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 12:17:06PM +0300, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > > > This reverts commit 43bb40c5b926 ("virtio_pci: Support surprise
> > > > removal of
> > > virtio pci device").
> > > >
> > > > Virtio drivers and PCI devices have never fully supported true
> > > > surprise (aka hot unplug) removal. Drivers historically continued
> > > > processing and waiting for pending I/O and even continued
> > > > synchronous device reset during surprise removal. Devices have
> > > > also continued completing I/Os, doing DMA and allowing device
> > > > reset after surprise removal to support such drivers.
> > > >
> > > > Supporting it correctly would require a new device capability
> > >
> > > If a device is removed, it is removed.
> > This is how it was implemented and none of the virtio drivers supported it.
> > So vendors had stepped away from such device implementation.
> > (not just us).
>
>
> If the slot does not have a mechanical interlock, I can pull the device out.
> It's
> not up to a device implementation.
Sure yes, stack is not there yet to support it.
Each of the virtio device drivers are not there yet.
Lets build that infra, let device indicate it and it will be smooth ride for
driver and device.
