On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 2:30 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 02:13:42PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > queue_reset removal has far more editorial changes. > > > Before I update the v4 to incorporate, please discuss/sync with Michael > > > or others what is best course of action from spec timing perspective. > > > I am ok either way to draft either by > > > (a) removal of queue_reset register and allow queue_disable by replacing > > > RING_RESET definition in v4 > > > Or > > > (b) fixing the polarity as done in v3 > > > > Ok. > > > > Thanks > > So Jason, what is your take?
I don't object Parav's idea. Just want to seek if there's something better. > I am inclined to keep queue reset register > and just flip the polarity. Less spec work and semantics are more or > less clear. Not helpful for migration - limited to queue > resize, watchdog and similar uses - but if we are expanding > scope to migration that makes it imo not 1.2 material. That's fine consider queue_reset has more users than just migration. Thanks > > -- > MST > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
