On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 11:01 AM Hanna Czenczek <hre...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 09.05.23 08:31, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: > > On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 9:12 PM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@redhat.com> wrote: > > [...] > > >> VHOST_USER_GET_VRING_BASE itself isn't really enough because it stops a > >> specific virtqueue but not the whole device. Unfortunately stopping all > >> virtqueues is not the same as SUSPEND since spontaneous device activity > >> is possible independent of any virtqueue (e.g. virtio-scsi events and > >> maybe virtio-net link status). > >> > >> That's why I think SUSPEND is necessary for a solution that's generic > >> enough to cover all device types. > >> > > I agree. > > > > In particular virtiofsd is already resetting all the device at > > VHOST_USER_GET_VRING_BASE if I'm not wrong, so that's even more of a > > reason to implement suspend call. > > Oh, no, just the vring in question. Not the whole device. > > In addition, we still need the GET_VRING_BASE call anyway, because, > well, we want to restore the vring on the destination via SET_VRING_BASE. >
Ok, that makes sense, sorry for the confusion! Thanks!
