linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] virtio_balloon: transitional interface

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 1 Apr 2015 15:00:58 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] virtio_balloon: transitional interface

On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 12:57:48PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 12:28:30 +0200
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 12:22:44PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > > On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 11:43:46 +0200
> > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 07:53:14PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> writes:
> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:17:23PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > > > > >> I would leave the device *exactly* as is, ugly structure packing and
> > > > > >> all.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But why?  It's going to be used for years, might as well make it clean?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Because the only spec which currently exists says to do that.
> > > > 
> > > > OK but the only spec which currently exists also says it's a legacy only
> > > > device, so driver must not set VERSION_1.  So surely, we can make minor
> > > > changes when VERSION_1 is set, like we did for other devices.
> > > 
> > > But we don't plan to replace the other devices, so it makes sense to do
> > > some changes for 1.0.
> > 
> > I'm not sure what the above says. Do you agree with
> > making minor changes in device behaviour?
> 
> The other way around.
> 
> > Also to be clear, I think this is 1.1 material.
> 
> Btw, I'd really like to see your proposed spec updates.

Just sent.

> > 
> > > > 
> > > > Let me post the latest patches I'm working on,
> > > > see what you think then.
> > > > 
> > > > >  We do
> > > > > need a new virtio memballoon spec, but it'll look nothing like this
> > > > > anyway.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Rusty.
> > > > 
> > > > I think it's going to have significantly different semantics, too,
> > > > so not much value in making that one work with current
> > > > drivers, right?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > So why not just keep virtio-balloon as-is and just specify endianness
> > > etc. for 1.0? Keeps the old drivers going without hacks,
> > > and we can
> > > start with a fresh driver for the new virtio-balloon.
> > 
> > Well it doesn't really, we need cpu_to_virtio in a bunch of
> > places anyway.
> 
> Of course, but what about keeping changes minimal?
> > 
> > So I kind of prefer making it clean, even just to avoid setting a bad
> > example for other devices.
> > 
> > Let me post the new patch where it's all fixed in a cleaner way, and
> > everyone can discuss whether it's too much work.
> > 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/