[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190408151735.itsfswajk5ww3ejv@steredhat>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 17:17:35 +0200
From: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/4] vsock/virtio: change the maximum packet size
allowed
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 10:57:44AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 04:55:31PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > > Anyway, any change to this behavior requires compatibility so new guest
> > > drivers work with old vhost_vsock.ko. Therefore we should probably just
> > > leave the limit for now.
> >
> > I understood your point of view and I completely agree with you.
> > But, until we don't have a way to expose features/versions between guest
> > and host,
>
> Why not use the standard virtio feature negotiation mechanism for this?
>
Yes, I have this in my mind :), but I want to understand better if we can
use virtio-net also for this mechanism.
For now, I don't think limiting the packets to 64 KiB is a big issue.
What do you think if I postpone this when I have more clear if we can
use virtio-net or not? (in order to avoid duplicated work)
Thanks,
Stefano
Powered by blists - more mailing lists