[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B311D20.7020400@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 21:25:20 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] AlacrityVM guest drivers for 2.6.33
On 12/22/2009 09:15 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> On 12/22/09 1:53 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> I asked why the irqfd/ioeventfd mechanisms are insufficient, and you did not reply.
>>
>>
> BTW: the ioeventfd issue just fell through the cracks, so sorry about
> that. Note that I have no specific issue with irqfd ever since the
> lockless IRQ injection code was added.
>
> ioeventfd turned out to be suboptimal for me in the fast path for two
> reasons:
>
> 1) the underlying eventfd is called in atomic context. I had posted
> patches to Davide to address that limitation, but I believe he rejected
> them on the grounds that they are only relevant to KVM.
>
If you're not doing something pretty minor, you're better of waking up a
thread (perhaps _sync if you want to keep on the same cpu). With the
new user return notifier thingie, that's pretty cheap.
> 2) it cannot retain the data field passed in the PIO. I wanted to have
> one vector that could tell me what value was written, and this cannot be
> expressed in ioeventfd.
>
>
It would be easier to add data logging support to ioeventfd, if it was
needed that badly.
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
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