On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 08:42:15AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 10/09/2012 08:24, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto: > >> > I chose the backend name because, ideally, there would be no other > >> > difference. QEMU _could_ implement all the goodies in vhost-scsi (such > >> > as reservations or ALUA), it just doesn't do that yet. > >> > > >> > Paolo > > Then why do you say "It is used completely differently from > > virtio-scsi-pci"? > > It is configured differently (and I haven't seen a proposal yet for how > to bridge the two), it does not interoperate, it has right now a > different set of features. > > The "does not interoperate" bit is particularly important. Say QEMU > were to implement persistent reservations (right now only a vhost-scsi > feature). Then QEMU and vhost-scsi PR would not be interchangeable, a > reservation made by QEMU would not be visible in vhost and vice versa.
So this is backend stuff, right? > > Isn't it just a different backend? > > > > If yes then it should be a backend option, like it is > > for virtio-net. > > You mean a -drive option? Yes. > That would mean adding the logic to configure > vhost-scsi to the QEMU block layer, that's a completely different project... > > Paolo This is an implementation detail. You can make it -drive option but still have all the actual logic outside block layer. All you need in block is option parsing code. Please take a look at how -net does this: we did *not* add all logic to qemu net layer. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
