linux-kernel - Re: [net-next RFC V5 4/5] virtio

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <500A9A72.20507@gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 21 Jul 2012 14:02:58 +0200
From:	Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC:	Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, mashirle@...ibm.com,
	krkumar2@...ibm.com, habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
	tahm@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, jwhan@...ewood.snu.ac.kr,
	davem@...emloft.net, akong@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	sri@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [net-next RFC V5 4/5] virtio_net: multiqueue support

On 07/20/2012 03:40 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> -	err = init_vqs(vi);
>> > +	if (virtio_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_NET_F_CTRL_VQ))
>> > +		vi->has_cvq = true;
>> > +
> How about we disable multiqueue if there's no cvq?
> Will make logic a bit simpler, won't it?

multiqueues don't really depend on cvq. Does this added complexity really justifies adding an artificial limit?


--
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/