On 27/09/20 12:40, Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> + qos_node_consumes("virtio-9p-device-local", "virtio-bus", &opts);
> + qos_node_produces("virtio-9p-device-local", "virtio-local");
This should produce "virtio", similar to what I remarked in the previous
patch.
> + qos_node_produces("virtio-9p-device-local", "virtio-9p-local");
> +
> + /* virtio-9p-pci-local */
> + opts.extra_device_opts = local_str_addr;
> + add_qpci_address(&opts, &addr);
> + qos_node_create_driver_named("virtio-9p-pci-local", "virtio-9p-pci",
> + virtio_9p_pci_create);
> + qos_node_consumes("virtio-9p-pci-local", "pci-bus", &opts);
> + qos_node_produces("virtio-9p-pci-local", "pci-device");
> + qos_node_produces("virtio-9p-pci-local", "virtio-local");
> + qos_node_produces("virtio-9p-pci-local", "virtio-9p-local");
> }
The implementation in patches 1 and 2 is reasonable, but what is the
advantage of this as opposed to specifying the fsdev in the edge options
for the test (similar to virtio-net)? I was expecting both
virtio-9p-device-synth and virtio-9p-device-local to produce virtio-9p,
so that the existing tests would be reused automatically by the qos
graph walk.
As things stand, I don't see any reason to have separate devices for
different backends.
Paolo
