On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 7:31 AM Jason Wang <jasow...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 3:19 AM Eugenio Pérez <epere...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > VIRTIO_F_ORDER_PLATFORM indicates that memory accesses by the driver and > > the device are ordered in a way described by the platform. Since vDPA > > devices may be backed by a hardware devices, let's allow > > VIRTIO_F_ORDER_PLATFORM. > > > > Signed-off-by: Eugenio Pérez <epere...@redhat.com> > > --- > > hw/virtio/vhost-shadow-virtqueue.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/hw/virtio/vhost-shadow-virtqueue.c > > b/hw/virtio/vhost-shadow-virtqueue.c > > index 4307296358..6bb1998f12 100644 > > --- a/hw/virtio/vhost-shadow-virtqueue.c > > +++ b/hw/virtio/vhost-shadow-virtqueue.c > > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ bool vhost_svq_valid_features(uint64_t features, Error > > **errp) > > switch (b) { > > case VIRTIO_F_ANY_LAYOUT: > > case VIRTIO_RING_F_EVENT_IDX: > > + case VIRTIO_F_ORDER_PLATFORM: > > Do we need to add this bit to vdpa_feature_bits[] as well? >
If we want to pass it to the guest, yes we should. I'll send another patch for it. But I think that should be done on top / in parallel actually. Open question: Should all vdpa hardware devices offer it? Or this is only needed on specific archs? Thanks!