lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V3 16/19] virtio-pci: introduce modern device module
On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 11:29:46AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 2021/2/8 下午8:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 01:42:27PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > On 2021/2/5 下午11:34, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 02:55:00PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang<jasowang@redhat.com>
> > > > I don't exactly get why we need to split the modern driver out,
> > > > and it can confuse people who are used to be seeing virtio-pci.
> > >
> > > The virtio-pci module still there. No user visible changes. Just some codes
> > > that could be shared with other driver were split out.
> > >
> > What I am saying is this: we can have virtio-vdpa depend on
> > virtio-pci without splitting the common code out to an
> > extra module.
>
>
> Ok.
>
>
> >
> > > > The vdpa thing so far looks like a development tool, why do
> > > > we care that it depends on a bit of extra code?
> > >
> > > If I'm not misunderstanding, trying to share codes is proposed by you here:
> > >
> > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/10/232
> > >
> > > We also had the plan to convert IFCVF to use this library.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > If that happens then an extra module might become useful.
>
>
> So does it make sense that I post a new version and let's merge it first.
> Then Intel or I can convert IFCVF to use the library?
>
> Thanks

Generally it's best if we actually have a couple of users before we bother
with refactoring - it's hard to predict the future,
so we don't really know what kind of refactoring will work for IFCVF ...

>
> >

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-09 10:31    [W:0.057 / U:1.888 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site