* Will Deacon <[email protected]> [2020-04-30 11:41:50]: > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 04:04:46PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote: > > If CONFIG_VIRTIO_MMIO_OPS is defined, then I expect this to be > > unconditionally > > set to 'magic_qcom_ops' that uses hypervisor-supported interface for IO (for > > example: message_queue_send() and message_queue_recevie() hypercalls). > > Hmm, but then how would such a kernel work as a guest under all the > spec-compliant hypervisors out there?
Ok I see your point and yes for better binary compatibility, the ops have to be set based on runtime detection of hypervisor capabilities. > > Ok. I guess the other option is to standardize on a new virtio transport > > (like > > ivshmem2-virtio)? > > I haven't looked at that, but I suppose it depends on what your hypervisor > folks are willing to accomodate. I believe ivshmem2_virtio requires hypervisor to support PCI device emulation (for life-cycle management of VMs), which our hypervisor may not support. A simple shared memory and doorbell or message-queue based transport will work for us. -- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
