On 2020/2/18 下午9:56, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 02:08:03PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
I thought you were copied in the patch [1], maybe we can move vhost related
discussion there to avoid confusion.
[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/811210/
Wow, that is .. confusing.
So this is supposed to duplicate the uAPI of vhost-user?
It tries to reuse the uAPI of vhost with some extension.
But it is
open coded and duplicated because .. vdpa?
I'm not sure I get here, vhost module is reused for vhost-vdpa and all
current vhost device (e.g net) uses their own char device.
So it's cheaper and simpler to introduce a new bus instead of refactoring a
well known bus and API where brunches of drivers and devices had been
implemented for years.
If you reason for this approach is to ease the implementation then you
should talk about it in the cover letters/etc
I will add more rationale in both cover letter and this patch.
Thanks
Maybe it is reasonable to do this because the rework is too great, I
don't know, but to me this whole thing looks rather messy.
Remember this stuff is all uAPI as it shows up in sysfs, so you can
easilly get stuck with it forever.
Jason
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
