[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGF4SLgDk+48aLKHhA_ZgRc6D30tGdnB89b5m5bZKwzyoDb0dQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2018 22:28:34 -0500
From: Vitaly Mayatskih <v.mayatskih@...il.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc: "Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] vhost: add per-vq worker thread
On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 9:53 PM Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> wrote:
> I wonder whether or not it's better to allow the device to specific the
> worker here instead of forcing a per vq worker model. Then we can keep
> the behavior of exist implementation and do optimization on top?
I was thinking about that too, but for the sake of simplicity it
sounds valid that if the user wanted 8 parallel queues for the disk,
they better be parallel, i.e. worker per queue. The rest of disks that
don't need high-performance, can have 1 queue specified.
--
wbr, Vitaly
Powered by blists - more mailing lists