On 09/18/2017 02:13 PM, Gonglei (Arei) wrote: >> Destroy does not need to specify queue_id. That means session_id's aren't >> queue scoped from namespace perspective. The question remains what is >> queue_id good for, and whether a session type op request should be >> rejected if the the session id originates from a session creation >> request specifying a different dataqueue (not the dataqueue containing >> the given request)? >> > My original idea about the queue_id is using the queue_id to specify which > datequeue of the following data requests will be used. But after deep > thinking, > I find that the queue_id is superfluous, and the current code in QEMU also > don't use the queue_id value as well. That's because the we can use session_id > to find the pervious session information and get the current dataqueue id > from the used virtqueue . > > So maybe we should drop the queue_id this time. > >
Sounds reasonable to me. We can make it reserved and ignored in the specification. Linux uses it, but it's always set to 0 as we only support one data-queue (if I'm not wrong). So reserved and must be zero is an option too. Halil
