On Fri, 2023-12-22 at 11:51 +0100, Dragos Tatulea wrote: > On Fri, 2023-12-22 at 03:29 -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 03:07:22PM +0000, Dragos Tatulea wrote: > > > > > > In that case you're right, we don't need feature flags. But I think > > > > > > it > > > > > > would be great to also move the error return in case userspace tries > > > > > > to modify vq parameters out of suspend state. > > > > > > > > > > > On the driver side or on the core side? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Core side. > > > > > > > Checking my understanding: instead of the feature flags there would be a > > > check > > > (for .set_vq_addr and .set_vq_state) to return an error if they are > > > called under > > > DRIVER_OK and not suspended state? > > > > Yea this looks much saner, if we start adding feature flags for > > each OPERATION_X_LEGAL_IN_STATE_Y then we will end up with N^2 > > feature bits which is not reasonable. > > > Ack. Is the v2 enough or should I respin a v5 with the updated Acked-by tags? > > I will prepare the core part as a different series without the flags. > Core part sent: https://lore.kernel.org/virtualization/20231225134210.151540-1-dtatu...@nvidia.com/T/#t
I also have a v2 respin with extra Acked-by tags if necessary as a v5. Just let me know if it is needed. Thanks, Dragos
