From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 220C4C433E3 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 09:35:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F243F20656 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 09:35:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="RD67+ys1" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726809AbgGPJfb (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2020 05:35:31 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-2.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.81]:38269 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726080AbgGPJfb (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2020 05:35:31 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1594892130; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=IJFxd0jLmfzMQe2B9WNqDr2oh3ke3LZeNfHLfAyP12M=; b=RD67+ys1TUuu8QrLchyEvQ97UfCNMF1ukS+t9KMYJjXvgjBejkXa0lIl7saGdE1wfLfT2q sb7quTd/0msd9P0eJlz1Mj45+WtXiYs5H6B3OiWenkFrN7sI/+3NB7L57tiqnJccw2ADnu uT68gO5wHDDf9JtPhP32VysPm79BWJc= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-27-OiUrh0QhPKywNJPooNFGRQ-1; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 05:35:26 -0400 X-MC-Unique: OiUrh0QhPKywNJPooNFGRQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F25961005269; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 09:35:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.72.12.131] (ovpn-12-131.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.12.131]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DACCD5D9DC; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 09:35:19 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH vhost next 06/10] vdpa: Add means to communicate vq status on get_vq_state To: Eli Cohen Cc: mst@redhat.com, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, shahafs@mellanox.com, saeedm@mellanox.com, Parav Pandit References: <20200716072327.5359-1-eli@mellanox.com> <20200716072327.5359-7-eli@mellanox.com> <20200716082116.GA182860@mtl-vdi-166.wap.labs.mlnx> From: Jason Wang Message-ID: <296e6fcb-946c-f577-2e22-46528f78fda9@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 17:35:18 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200716082116.GA182860@mtl-vdi-166.wap.labs.mlnx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2020/7/16 下午4:21, Eli Cohen wrote: > On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 04:11:00PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> On 2020/7/16 下午3:23, Eli Cohen wrote: >>> Currently, get_vq_state() is used only to pass the available index value >>> of a vq. Extend the struct to return status on the VQ to the caller. >>> For now, define VQ_STATE_NOT_READY. In the future it will be extended to >>> include other infomration. >>> >>> Modify current vdpa driver to update this field. >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Parav Pandit >>> Signed-off-by: Eli Cohen >> What's the difference between this and get_vq_ready()? >> >> Thanks >> > There is no difference. It is just a way to communicate a problem to > with the state of the VQ back to the caller. This is not available now. > I think an asynchronous is preferred but that is not available > currently. I still don't see the reason, maybe you can give me an example? Thanks