On Wed, Mar 22 2023, Parav Pandit <[email protected]> wrote:
>> From: Cornelia Huck <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2023 11:21 AM
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 22 2023, Heng Qi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > +The driver MUST NOT set \field{vqn} to any value other than an enabled
>> transmit or receive virtqueue number.
>>
> Why do you suggest a negative statement here?
> How is it better than,
> The driver MUST set ...
So make it
"The driver MUST set \field{vqn} to the virtqueue number of an enabled
transmit or receive virtqueue." ?
Although I find this slightly less compelling than "do not set vqn to
anything else".
>
> The device will anyway have to check and apply the parameter to the right
> virtqueue.
> And if the vq is not enabled or vq is not tx or rx vq, it needs to fail the
> command.
Well, I think we want to avoid having to add a normative statement for
the device, so we need to be strict with what the driver is allowed to
do.
>
>> "than the virtqueue number of an enabled transmit or receive virtqueue"
>>
>> might be better -- what do others think?
>>
>> Otherwise, LGTM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
