On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 11:07:06AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > Well that's because e.g. kvmtest actually depends on pci-testdev.
> > IOW it's actually supported.
> 
> This again just sounds like a downstream 'support' rationalization.
> I'm still not seeing a compelling reason why the vhost user generic
> device should be disabled by default in upstream, especially if we
> mark it as an experimental device with an x- prefix. 
> 
> With regards,
> Daniel

We can do that. I am still somewhat puzzled by whether making
it unsupported/experimental addresses the actual need, which
seems to be to expose it to end users?

Once something is used in the field, we can't take it back
whether we added x- to the name or not.

What are your thoughts if it's not marked as experimental?

-- 
MST


Reply via email to