On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 08:35:37PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote: > > > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]> > > Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2023 4:29 PM > > > > The driver has a final decision. Let's make it a SHOULD and then if driver > > knows > > best then it has the choice? > > > > As you said, the driver has the final say. > There is really no reason to complicate the spec for a narrow case where > device cannot judge. > > > > > > > But I don't see any configs where leaving this to the driver's > > > > discretion is preferable. If you see one let me know. > > > > > > In doesn't need to be config. > > > It is the environment that chooses which is preferred by the driver. > > > For example preference of accessibility over ordering. > > > > > > what does accessibility mean exactly? I definitely see OSes where owner > > driver > > can't access a member. > Accessibility = access a member > > > So in that case naturally driver will skip the entry for member even if > > it's first. > > maybe there are configs where member access is possible but is very slow > > e.g. > > with lots of indirect function calls? > > OK fine, but then it will be up to the driver to test and make damn sure the > > benefits outweight the costs. > > > > IOW it's a hint for the driver. If you like you can say it explicitly even. > > > Device doesnt know anything about those indirect function calls, so device > cannot hint about driver environment. > > Can we please avoid this over engineering? > Interface has the doors open for driver to make wise decision depending on > its environment.
what if driver can access both with the same ease? this is the case that bothers me and I think it's practical since it will be common on linux. -- MST --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
