On Mon, Oct 04 2021, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 02:01:14PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 03 2021, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > @@ -160,6 +163,33 @@ \subsection{Legacy Interface: A Note on Feature
>> > Specification text within these sections generally does not apply
>> > to non-transitional devices.
>> >
>> > +\begin{note}
>> > +The device offers different features when used through
>> > +the legacy interface and when operated in accordance with this
>> > +specification.
>> > +\end{note}
>> > +
>> > +Transitional drivers MUST use Devices only through the legacy interface
>>
>> s/Devices only through the legacy interface/devices through the legacy
>> interface only/
>>
>> ?
>
> Both versions are actually confused, since how do you
> find out that device does not offer VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1?
>
> I think what this should really say is
>
> Transitional drivers MUST NOT accept VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 through
> the legacy interface.
Ok, that makes sense.
Would it make sense that transitional drivers MUST accept VERSION_1
through the non-legacy interface? Or is that redundant?
>
>
> Does linux actually satisfy this? Will it accept VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1
> through the legacy interface if offered?
I think that the Linux drivers will not operate on feature bit 32+ if
they are in legacy mode?
>>
>> Generally, looks good to me.
>
> Do we want to also add explanation that features can be
> changed until FEATURES_OK?
I always considered that to be implict, as feature negotiation is not
over until we have FEATURES_OK. Not sure whether we need an extra note.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
