[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200905172346.14498.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 23:46:12 +0930
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: Mark McLoughlin <markmc@...hat.com>, dlaor@...hat.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Dor Laor <dor@...hat.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] virtio: indirect ring entries (VIRTIO_RING_F_INDIRECT_DESC)
On Sun, 17 May 2009 03:57:01 pm Avi Kivity wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
> > +static void adjust_threshold(struct vring_virtqueue *vq,
> > + unsigned int out, unsigned int in)
> > +{
> > + /* There are really two species of virtqueue, and it matters here.
> > + * If there are no output parts, it's a "normally full" receive queue,
> > + * otherwise it's a "normally empty" send queue. */
>
> This comment is true for networking, but not for block. ++overkill with
> a ->adjust_threshold op.
No, it's true for block. It has output parts, so we should reduce threshold
when it's full. Network recvq is an example which should reduce threshold
when it's empty.
->adjust_threshold is better as an arg to vring_new_virtqueue, but it's still
not clear what the answer would be.
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists