[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211004112528.74442e52.pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 11:25:28 +0200
From: Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Xie Yongji <xieyongji@...edance.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, markver@...ibm.com,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] virtio: write back features before verify
On Mon, 04 Oct 2021 09:01:42 +0200
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 02 2021, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 05:18:46PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> >> I'd say we need a hack here so that we assume little-endian config space
> >> if VERSION_1 has been offered; if your patch here works, I assume QEMU
> >> does what we expect (assmuming little-endian as well.) I'm mostly
> >> wondering what happens if you use a different VMM; can we expect it to
> >> work similar to QEMU?
> >
> > Hard to say of course ... hopefully other VMMs are actually
> > implementing the spec. E.g. IIUC rust vmm is modern only.
>
> Yes, I kind of hope they are simply doing LE config space accesses.
>
> Are there any other VMMs that are actually supported on s390x (or other
> BE architectures)?
>
I think zCX (z/OS Container Extensions) is relevant as it uses virtio.
That is all I know about.
Regards,
Halil
Powered by blists - more mailing lists