Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <[email protected]> writes: > On 30.08.25 11:17, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> This option simply duplicates the @vhost option since long ago >>> (10 years!) >>> commit 1e7398a140f7a6 ("vhost: enable vhost without without MSI-X"). >> >> This isn't obvious to me. >> >> As far as I can see, their only use is in net_init_tap_one(): >> >> if (tap->has_vhost ? tap->vhost : >> vhostfdname || (tap->has_vhostforce && tap->vhostforce)) { >> >> Can you take this apart for me? > > Prior 1e7398a140f7a6, to enable vhost for some specific kind of guests > (that don't have MSI-X support), you should hav set vhostforce=on > (with vhost=on or unset). > > Since 1e7398a140f7a6, guest type doesn't matter, all guests are equal > for vhost-enabling options logic. > > So we simply have redundant options: > > vhost=on / vhost=off : vhostforce ignored, doesn't make sense > > vhost unset : vhostforce counts, enabling vhost > > So you may enable vhost several ways: > - vhost=on > - vhostforce=on > - vhost=on + vhostforce=on > - and even vhost=on + vhostforce=off > > - they are all equal.
So @vhostforce doesn't quite duplicate @vhost: if they conflict, @vhost silently takes precedence. >>> Let's finally deprecate it. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> docs/about/deprecated.rst | 7 +++++++ >>> qapi/net.json | 6 +++++- >>> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/docs/about/deprecated.rst b/docs/about/deprecated.rst >>> index d50645a071..d14cb37480 100644 >>> --- a/docs/about/deprecated.rst >>> +++ b/docs/about/deprecated.rst >>> @@ -516,6 +516,13 @@ Stream ``reconnect`` (since 9.2) >>> The ``reconnect`` option only allows specifying second granularity >>> timeouts, >>> which is not enough for all types of use cases, use ``reconnect-ms`` >>> instead. >>> +TAP ``vhostforce`` (since 10.2) >>> +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>> + >>> +The ``vhostforce`` option just duplicates the main ``vhost`` option. >>> +Use ``vhost`` alone. >> >> Would "Use instead ``vhost`` instead" be clearer? > > I meant, that user should not use vhost=on + vhostforce=on anymore. > > My be just "Use ``vhost``", without "alone"/"instead"? Suggest The ``vhostforce`` option is redundant with the ``vhost`` option. If they conflict, ``vhost`` takes precedence. Just use ``vhost``. Thanks! [...]
