qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/7] virtio: relax feature check


From: Cornelia Huck
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/7] virtio: relax feature check
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 15:44:46 +0200

On Tue, 12 May 2015 15:34:47 +0200
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 03:14:53PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Wed, 06 May 2015 14:07:37 +0200
> > Greg Kurz <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> > > Unlike with add and clear, there is no valid reason to abort when checking
> > > for a feature. It makes more sense to return false (i.e. the feature bit
> > > isn't set). This is exactly what __virtio_has_feature() does if fbit >= 
> > > 32.
> > > 
> > > This allows to introduce code that is aware about new 64-bit features like
> > > VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1, even if they are still not implemented.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <address@hidden>
> > > ---
> > >  include/hw/virtio/virtio.h |    1 -
> > >  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h b/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h
> > > index d95f8b6..6ef70f1 100644
> > > --- a/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h
> > > +++ b/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h
> > > @@ -233,7 +233,6 @@ static inline void virtio_clear_feature(uint32_t 
> > > *features, unsigned int fbit)
> > > 
> > >  static inline bool __virtio_has_feature(uint32_t features, unsigned int 
> > > fbit)
> > >  {
> > > -    assert(fbit < 32);
> > >      return !!(features & (1 << fbit));
> > >  }
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > I must say I'm not very comfortable with knowingly passing out-of-rage
> > values to this function.
> > 
> > Can we perhaps apply at least the feature-bit-size extending patches
> > prior to your patchset, if the remainder of the virtio-1 patchset still
> > takes some time?
> 
> So the feature-bit-size extending patches currently don't support
> migration correctly, that's why they are not merged.
> 
> What I think we need to do for this is move host_features out
> from transports into core virtio device.
> 
> Then we can simply check host features >31 and skip
> migrating low guest features is none set.
> 
> Thoughts? Any takers?
> 

After we move host_features, put them into an optional vmstate
subsection?

I think with the recent patchsets, most of the interesting stuff is
already not handled by the transport anymore. There's only
VIRTIO_F_NOTIFY_ON_EMPTY and VIRTIO_F_BAD_FEATURE left (set by pci and
ccw).




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]