Re: [PATCH v6 04/13] vpci: restrict unhandled read/write operations for guests

[Oleksandr Andrushchenko <Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@xxxxxxxx>]

On 08.02.22 11:04, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 08.02.2022 09:00, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>> On 04.02.22 16:24, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>>> On 04.02.22 16:11, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 04.02.2022 07:34, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>>>>> A guest can read and write those registers which are not emulated and
>>>>> have no respective vPCI handlers, so it can access the HW directly.
>>>> I don't think this describes the present situation. Or did I miss where
>>>> devices can actually be exposed to guests already, despite much of the
>>>> support logic still missing?
>>> No, they are not exposed yet and you know that.
>>> I will update the commit message
>> BTW, all this work is about adding vpci for guests and of course this
>> is not going to be enabled right away.
>> I would like to hear the common acceptable way of documenting such
>> things: either we just say something like "A guest can read and write"
>> elsewhere or we need to invent something neutral not directly mentioning
>> what the change does. With the later it all seems a bit confusing IMO
>> as we do know what we are doing and for what reason: enable vpci for guests
> What's the problem with describing things as they are? Code is hwdom-
> only right now, and you're trying to enable DomU support. Hence it's
> all about "would be able to", not "can".
Sounds good, will use that wording then
>
> Jan
>
>
Thank you,
Oleksandr