| 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: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 15:48:00 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, jasowang@...hat.com, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] virtio-scsi: introduce multiqueue support On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 01:54:17PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > This patch adds queue steering to virtio-scsi. When a target is sent > multiple requests, we always drive them to the same queue so that FIFO > processing order is kept. However, if a target was idle, we can choose > a queue arbitrarily. In this case the queue is chosen according to the > current VCPU, so the driver expects the number of request queues to be > equal to the number of VCPUs. This makes it easy and fast to select > the queue, and also lets the driver optimize the IRQ affinity for the > virtqueues (each virtqueue's affinity is set to the CPU that "owns" > the queue). > > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> I guess an alternative is a per-target vq. Is the reason you avoid this that you expect more targets than cpus? If yes this is something you might want to mention in the log. -- 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