[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A8A9C69.6060900@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:19:53 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Gregory Haskins <GHaskins@...ell.com>
CC: mst@...hat.com, mingo@...e.hu, gregory.haskins@...il.com,
alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] vbus: add a "vbus-proxy" bus model for vbus_drive
On 08/18/2009 03:11 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> Sorry for the toppost. Still not at the office.
>
> I just wanted to add that we've already been through this disussion once. (Search "haskins hypercall lkml" on google and I'm sure you are bound to see hits.
>
>
Your numbers showed a 350ns difference on fairly old (by now) hardware.
I doubt the difference will exceed 200ns now.
> The fact is: the original vbus was designed with hypercalls, and it drew much of these same critisims. In the end, hypercalls are only marginally faster than PIO (iirc, 450ns faster, and shrinking), so we decided that it was not worth further discussion at the time.
>
Has anything changed?
> A better solution is probably PIOoHC, so that you retain the best properties of both. The only problem with the entire PIOx approach is that its x86 specific, but that is an entirely different thread.
>
pio is nicely abstracted by PCI. virtio-pci will use pio on x86 and
mmio on non-x86.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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