[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3af22408-f0f1-7e04-48ab-852619d28ef6@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 12:03:52 +0800
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Alex Williamson (alex.williamson@...hat.com)\"\""
<alex.williamson@...hat.com>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal
在 2021/6/10 上午10:00, Jason Wang 写道:
>
> 在 2021/6/8 下午9:20, Jason Gunthorpe 写道:
>> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 09:10:42AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>
>>> Well, this sounds like a re-invention of io_uring which has already
>>> worked
>>> for multifds.
>> How so? io_uring is about sending work to the kernel, not getting
>> structued events back?
>
>
> Actually it can. Userspace can poll multiple fds via preparing
> multiple sqes with IORING_OP_ADD flag.
IORING_OP_POLL_ADD actually.
Thanks
>
>
>>
>> It is more like one of the perf rings
>
>
> This means another ring and we need introduce ioctl() to add or remove
> ioasids from the poll. And it still need a kind of fallback like a
> list if the ring is full.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>>
>> Jason
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists