linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 4/4] xen, blkback: add support for multiple block rings

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]

Date:	Fri, 22 Aug 2014 14:15:58 +0100
From:	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
To:	Arianna Avanzini <avanzini.arianna@...il.com>,
	<konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	<bob.liu@...cle.com>, <felipe.franciosi@...rix.com>, <axboe@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 4/4] xen, blkback: add support for multiple block
 rings

On 22/08/14 12:20, Arianna Avanzini wrote:
> This commit adds to xen-blkback the support to retrieve the block
> layer API being used and the number of available hardware queues,
> in case the block layer is using the multi-queue API. This commit
> also lets the driver advertise the number of available hardware
> queues to the frontend via XenStore, therefore allowing for actual
> multiple I/O rings to be used.

Does it make sense for number of queues should be dependent on the
number of queues available in the underlying block device?  What
behaviour do we want when a domain is migrated to a host with different
storage?

Can you split this patch up as well?

David
--
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/