[virtio-dev] RE: [virtio-comment] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-pci: implement VIRTIO_F_QUEUE_STATE

> From: Zhu, Lingshan <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2023 9:33 AM
> To: Parav Pandit <[email protected]>; Jason Wang <[email protected]>
> Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
> open.org; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [virtio-comment] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-pci: implement
> VIRTIO_F_QUEUE_STATE
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/13/2023 10:23 AM, Parav Pandit wrote:
> >> From: Zhu, Lingshan <[email protected]>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2023 3:45 PM
> >>> Do you find the administration commands we proposed in [1] useful
> >>> for
> >> nested case?
> >>> If not, both will likely diverge.
> >> Not till now.
> > I don’t think you reviewed [1] enough.
> > Following functionality that you want to post in v1 is already covered.
> > Why cannot you use it from [1]?
> >
> > a. Dirty page tracking (write recording in [1]), b. device
> > suspend/resume (mode setting) c. inflight descriptors (device context)
> >
> > [1]
> > https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-comment/202309/msg00061.h
> > tml
> you cut off the message, I don't know which conversation you are replying to.
> 
> But anyway, as pointed out many times, we are implementing basic facilities.

I asked you what parts of the series [1] can be used by you for inflight tracking, dirty tracking, suspend/resume.
You replied, none is useful.
And after that you said you plan to send v2 that does dirty page tracking, inflight tracking.

So I asked why you cannot use [1] that covers things that you plan to send in future?

[1] https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-comment/202309/msg00061.html

Hope this clarifies.