On 17-01-22, 10:11, Alex Bennée wrote: > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes: > > > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 05:04:57PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> This patchset adds vhost-user-gpio device's support in Qemu. The support > >> for the > >> same has already been added to virtio specification and Linux Kernel. > >> > >> A Rust based backend is also in progress and is tested against this > >> patchset: > >> > >> https://github.com/rust-vmm/vhost-device/pull/76 > > > > > > I'm reluctant to add this with no tests in tree. > > Want to write a minimal libhost-user based backend?
I actually have one already, that I wrote before attempting the Rust counterpart, but never upstreamed as I am not sure if anyone is ever going to use it, as I am not. And I thought what's the point of merging code which I will never end up using. I am not sure what test I can add here to make sure this doesn't breaks in future though. > This is going to be a problem going forward as we have more out-of-tree > backends written as a first preference. While the first couple of vhost > devices have C implementations in contrib before we worked on the rust > version I think we are getting to the point of skipping a first C > version for future devices. > > However I notice we have qtest/vhost-user-test.c so would that be enough > to ensure we can instantiate the device and a basic vhost-user > initialisation sequence doesn't cause it to crap out. This obviously > won't be exercising the virtq processing itself but does that really > exercise any of QEMU's boilerplate anyway? > > > We also need some maintainers to step up. > > You mean more reviewers for the vhost and virtio sections of QEMU's > maintainers? And I too was waiting for replies on these. I can surely write something up if you guys feel there is a need. I just want to understand it better. -- viresh