On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 12:43:26PM -0700, Siwei Liu wrote: > > The semantics are that the primary is always used if present in > > preference to standby. > OK. If this is the only semantics of what "standby" refers to in > general, that is fine. > > I just don't want to limit the failover/standby semantics to the > device model specifics, the "accelerated datapath" thing or whatever. > I really don't know where the requirements of the "accelerated > datapath" came from,
It's a way to put it that matches what failover actually provides. > as the originial problem is migrating vfio > devices which is in match of QEMU's live migration model. If you put it this way then it's natural to require that we have a config with a working vfio device, and that we somehow add virtio for duration of migration. > Hyper-V has > it's limitation to do 1-netdev should not impact how KVM/QEMU should > be doing it. That's a linux thing and pretty orthogonal to host/guest interface. > > Jason said virtio net is sometimes preferable. > > If that's the case don't make it a standby. > > > > More advanced use-cases do exist and e.g. Alexander Duyck > > suggested using a switch-dev. > > The switchdev case would need a new feature bit, right? > > -Siwei I think it would need to be a completely new device. > > failover isn't it though. > > > > -- > > MST _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
