lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 15:53:19 +0930 From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Carsten Otte <cotte@...ibm.com>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>, linux390@...ibm.com, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>, Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>, Shirley Ma <xma@...ibm.com>, lguest@...ts.ozlabs.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, Krishna Kumar <krkumar2@...ibm.com>, Tom Lendacky <tahm@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, steved@...ibm.com, habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/18] virtio_ring: avail event index interface On Sun, 15 May 2011 15:47:27 +0300, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 01:43:15PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: > > On Wed, 4 May 2011 23:51:19 +0300, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> wrote: > > > #define VIRTIO_RING_F_USED_EVENT_IDX 29 > > > +/* The Host publishes the avail index for which it expects a kick > > > + * at the end of the used ring. Guest should ignore the used->flags field. */ > > > +#define VIRTIO_RING_F_AVAIL_EVENT_IDX 32 > > > > Are you really sure we want to separate the two? Seems a little simpler > > to have one bit to mean "we're publishing our threshold". For someone > > implementing this from scratch, it's a little simpler. > > > > Or are there cases where the old style makes more sense? > > > > Thanks, > > Rusty. > > Hmm, it makes debugging easier as each side can disable > publishing separately - I used it all the time when I saw > e.g. networking stuck to guess whether I need to investigate the > interrupt or the exit handling. > > But I'm not hung up on this. > > Let me know pls. If we combine them into one, then these patches no longer depend on the feature bit expansion, which is worthwhile (though I'll take both). Thanks, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists