The virtio documentation currently doesn't define any generic requirements that are applicable to all transports. They can be useful while adding support for a new transport.
This commit tries to define the same.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org --- V1->V2: - Lot of changes after discussions with Alex and Cornelia. - Almost a rewrite of the first commit. - Add Transport normative sections.
commands.tex | 1 + conformance.tex | 14 +++++++++ content.tex | 78 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 3 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/commands.tex b/commands.tex index 25ea8ee3bc78..692ef0833a88 100644 --- a/commands.tex +++ b/commands.tex @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ \newcommand{\field}[1]{\emph{#1}}
% Mark a normative section (driver or device) +\newcommand{\transportnormative}[3]{#1{Transport Requirements: #2}\label{transportnormative:#3}} \newcommand{\drivernormative}[3]{#1{Driver Requirements: #2}\label{drivernormative:#3}} \newcommand{\devicenormative}[3]{#1{Device Requirements: #2}\label{devicenormative:#3}} \newcounter{clausecounter} diff --git a/conformance.tex b/conformance.tex index dc00e84e75ae..9bb1c9e2f6ec 100644 --- a/conformance.tex +++ b/conformance.tex @@ -11,6 +11,10 @@ \section{Conformance Targets}\label{sec:Conformance / Conformance Targets}
Conformance targets: \begin{description} +\item[Transport] A transport MUST conform to following conformance clauses: + \begin{itemize} + \item Clause \ref{sec:Conformance / Transport Conformance}. + \end{itemize} \item[Driver] A driver MUST conform to four conformance clauses: \begin{itemize} \item Clause \ref{sec:Conformance / Driver Conformance}. @@ -66,6 +70,14 @@ \section{Conformance Targets}\label{sec:Conformance / Conformance Targets} \end{itemize} \end{description}
+\conformance{\section}{Transport Conformance}\label{sec:Conformance / Transport Conformance} + +A transport MUST conform to the following normative statements: + +\begin{itemize} +\item \ref{transportnormative:Virtio Transport Options / Virtio Transport Requirements} +\end{itemize} + \conformance{\section}{Driver Conformance}\label{sec:Conformance / Driver Conformance}
A driver MUST conform to the following normative statements: @@ -93,6 +105,7 @@ \section{Conformance Targets}\label{sec:Conformance / Conformance Targets} \item \ref{drivernormative:Basic Facilities of a Virtio Device / Packed Virtqueues / Supplying Buffers to The Device / Sending Available Buffer Notifications} \item \ref{drivernormative:General Initialization And Device Operation / Device Initialization} \item \ref{drivernormative:General Initialization And Device Operation / Device Cleanup} +\item \ref{drivernormative:Virtio Transport Options / Virtio Transport Requirements} \item \ref{drivernormative:Reserved Feature Bits} \end{itemize}
@@ -172,6 +185,7 @@ \section{Conformance Targets}\label{sec:Conformance / Conformance Targets} \item \ref{devicenormative:Basic Facilities of a Virtio Device / Packed Virtqueues / The Virtqueue Descriptor Table} \item \ref{devicenormative:Basic Facilities of a Virtio Device / Packed Virtqueues / Scatter-Gather Support} \item \ref{devicenormative:Basic Facilities of a Virtio Device / Shared Memory Regions} +\item \ref{devicenormative:Virtio Transport Options / Virtio Transport Requirements} \item \ref{devicenormative:Reserved Feature Bits} \end{itemize}
diff --git a/content.tex b/content.tex index 0a62dce5f65f..a79993b5ed69 100644 --- a/content.tex +++ b/content.tex @@ -631,8 +631,82 @@ \section{Device Cleanup}\label{sec:General Initialization And Device Operation /
\chapter{Virtio Transport Options}\label{sec:Virtio Transport Options}
-Virtio can use various different buses, thus the standard is split -into virtio general and bus-specific sections. +Devices and drivers can use different transport methods to enable +interaction, for example PCI, MMIO, or Channel I/O. The transport +methods define various aspects of the communication between the device +and the driver, like device discovery, exchanging capabilities, +interrupt handling, data transfer, etc. For example, in a host/guest +architecture, the host might expose a device to the guest on a PCI bus, +and the guest will use a PCI-specific driver to interact with it. + +The standard is split into sections describing general virtio +implementation and transport-specific sections. + +\section{Virtio Transport Requirements}\label{sec:Virtio Transport Options / Virtio Transport Requirements} + +\transportnormative{\subsection}{Virtio Transport Requirements}{Virtio Transport Options / Virtio Transport Requirements} +The transport MUST provide a mechanism for the driver to discover the +device. + +The transport MUST provide a mechanism for the driver to identify the +device type. + +The transport MUST provide a mechanism for communicating virtqueue +configurations between the device and the driver. + +The transport MUST allow multiple virtqueues per device. The number of +virtqueues for a pair of device-driver are governed by the individual +device protocol. + +The transport MUST provide a mechanism that the device and the driver +use to access memory for implementing virtqueues. + +The transport MUST provide a mechanism for the device to notify the +driver and a mechanism for the driver to notify the device, for example +regarding availability of a buffer on the virtqueue. + +The transport MAY provide a mechanism for the driver to initiate a +reset of the virtqueues and device. + +The transport SHOULD provide a mechanism for the driver to read the +device status. The transport MUST provide a mechanism for the driver to +change the device status. + +The transport MUST provide a mechanism to implement config space between +the device and the driver. + +\devicenormative{\subsection}{Virtio Transport Requirements}{Virtio Transport Options / Virtio Transport Requirements} + +The device MUST keep any data associated with a device-initiated +transaction accessible to the driver until the driver acknowledges the +transaction to be complete. + +The device MUST NOT access the contents of a virtqueue before the +driver notifies, in a transport defined way, the device that the +virtqueue is ready to be accessed. + +The device MUST NOT access or modify buffers on a virtqueue after it has +notified the driver about their availability. + +The device MUST reset the virtqueues if requested by the driver, in a +transport defined way, if the transport provides such a method. + +\drivernormative{\subsection}{Virtio Transport Requirements}{Virtio Transport Options / Virtio Transport Requirements} + +The driver MUST acknowledge device notifications, as mandated by the +transport. + +The driver MUST NOT access virtqueue contents before the device notifies +about the readiness of the same. + +The driver MUST NOT access buffers, after it has added them to the +virtqueue and notified the device about their availability. The driver +MAY access them after the device has processed them and notified the +driver of their availability, in a transport defined way. + +The driver MAY ask the device to reset the virtqueues if, for example, +the driver times out waiting for a notification from the device for a +previously queued request.
\input{transport-pci.tex} \input{transport-mmio.tex}
Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org writes:
The virtio documentation currently doesn't define any generic requirements that are applicable to all transports. They can be useful while adding support for a new transport.
This commit tries to define the same.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
LGTM:
Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée alex.bennee@linaro.org
On 30-01-24, 13:58, Viresh Kumar wrote:
The virtio documentation currently doesn't define any generic requirements that are applicable to all transports. They can be useful while adding support for a new transport.
This commit tries to define the same.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
V1->V2:
- Lot of changes after discussions with Alex and Cornelia.
- Almost a rewrite of the first commit.
- Add Transport normative sections.
Ping.
On Tue, Jan 30 2024, Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org wrote:
The virtio documentation currently doesn't define any generic requirements that are applicable to all transports. They can be useful while adding support for a new transport.
This commit tries to define the same.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
V1->V2:
- Lot of changes after discussions with Alex and Cornelia.
- Almost a rewrite of the first commit.
- Add Transport normative sections.
commands.tex | 1 + conformance.tex | 14 +++++++++ content.tex | 78 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 3 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/commands.tex b/commands.tex index 25ea8ee3bc78..692ef0833a88 100644 --- a/commands.tex +++ b/commands.tex @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ \newcommand{\field}[1]{\emph{#1}} % Mark a normative section (driver or device)
Nit: driver, device, or transport
+\newcommand{\transportnormative}[3]{#1{Transport Requirements: #2}\label{transportnormative:#3}} \newcommand{\drivernormative}[3]{#1{Driver Requirements: #2}\label{drivernormative:#3}} \newcommand{\devicenormative}[3]{#1{Device Requirements: #2}\label{devicenormative:#3}} \newcounter{clausecounter} diff --git a/conformance.tex b/conformance.tex index dc00e84e75ae..9bb1c9e2f6ec 100644 --- a/conformance.tex +++ b/conformance.tex @@ -11,6 +11,10 @@ \section{Conformance Targets}\label{sec:Conformance / Conformance Targets} Conformance targets: \begin{description} +\item[Transport] A transport MUST conform to following conformance clauses:
Maybe "MUST conform to one conformance clause"?
- \begin{itemize}
- \item Clause \ref{sec:Conformance / Transport Conformance}.
- \end{itemize}
\item[Driver] A driver MUST conform to four conformance clauses: \begin{itemize} \item Clause \ref{sec:Conformance / Driver Conformance}.
(...)
Apart from the nits above, this looks good to me.
I'd be in favour of initiating a vote for this, after the OASIS infrastructure migragion has completed and we have dealt with any fallout from that... that would probably mean March :(
(Oh, and this should probably go to virtio-comment as well.)
[Apologies for not reviewing earlier, but I'm struggling to keep afloat, and the OASIS infrastructure saga did not exactly help...]
On 13-02-24, 13:43, Cornelia Huck wrote:
Apart from the nits above, this looks good to me.
I'd be in favour of initiating a vote for this, after the OASIS infrastructure migragion has completed and we have dealt with any fallout from that... that would probably mean March :(
That's fine.
(Oh, and this should probably go to virtio-comment as well.)
Resent now.
[Apologies for not reviewing earlier, but I'm struggling to keep afloat, and the OASIS infrastructure saga did not exactly help...]
No issues :)
On Thu, Mar 28 2024, Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org wrote:
On 13-02-24, 13:43, Cornelia Huck wrote:
I'd be in favour of initiating a vote for this, after the OASIS infrastructure migragion has completed and we have dealt with any fallout from that... that would probably mean March :(
Is the migration over now ?
Unfortunately, we're not really in a state to resume working right now, and I do not have an ETA :(
stratos-dev@op-lists.linaro.org