[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87bp09ax7a.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 20:58:41 +0930
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>,
Krishna Kumar2 <krkumar2@...ibm.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, steved@...ibm.com,
Tom Lendacky <tahm@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, borntraeger@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: Network performance with small packets
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 23:01:12 +0300, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 12:19:42PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Here's an old patch where I played with implementing this:
>
> ...
>
> >
> > virtio: put last_used and last_avail index into ring itself.
> >
> > Generally, the other end of the virtio ring doesn't need to see where
> > you're up to in consuming the ring. However, to completely understand
> > what's going on from the outside, this information must be exposed.
> > For example, if you want to save and restore a virtio_ring, but you're
> > not the consumer because the kernel is using it directly.
> >
> > Fortunately, we have room to expand:
>
> This seems to be true for x86 kvm and lguest but is it true
> for s390?
Yes, as the ring is page aligned so there's always room.
> Will this last bit work on s390?
> If I understand correctly the memory is allocated by host there?
They have to offer the feature, so if the have some way of allocating
non-page-aligned amounts of memory, they'll have to add those extra 2
bytes.
So I think it's OK...
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