[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1243445144.16318.15.camel@blaa>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:25:44 +0000
From: Mark McLoughlin <markmc@...hat.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>, mtosatti@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [KVM PATCH v4 3/3] kvm: add iosignalfd support
On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 15:11 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Multiple cookies on the same address are required by virtio. You can't
> mux since the data doesn't go anywhere.
>
> Virtio can survive by checking all rings on a notify, and we can later
> add a mechanism that has a distinct address for each ring, but let's see
> if we can cope with multiple cookies. Mark?
Trying to catch up, but you're talking about replacing virtio-pci
QUEUE_NOTIFY handling with iosignalfd ?
For a perfect replacement, what you really need is to be able to
register multiple cookies per address range, but only have them trigger
if the written data matches a provided value.
If the data is lost, virtio has no way of knowing which queue is being
notified, so we either end up with per-device, rather than per-queue,
notifications (probably not too bad for net, at least) or a different
notify address per queue (limiting the number of queues per device).
Cheers,
Mark.
--
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