[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121008204145.GA17820@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 22:41:45 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: Thomas Lendacky <tahm@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, avi@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] virtio-net: inline header support
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 04:14:17PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> writes:
>
> > Thinking about Sasha's patches, we can reduce ring usage
> > for virtio net small packets dramatically if we put
> > virtio net header inline with the data.
> > This can be done for free in case guest net stack allocated
> > extra head room for the packet, and I don't see
> > why would this have any downsides.
>
> I've been wanting to do this for the longest time... but...
>
> > Even though with my recent patches qemu
> > no longer requires header to be the first s/g element,
> > we need a new feature bit to detect this.
> > A trivial qemu patch will be sent separately.
>
> There's a reason I haven't done this. I really, really dislike "my
> implemention isn't broken" feature bits. We could have an infinite
> number of them, for each bug in each device.
>
> So my plan was to tie this assumption to the new PCI layout.
I don't object but old qemu has this limitation for s390 as well,
and that's not using PCI, right? So how do we detect
new hypervisor there?
--
MST
--
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