| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/3] Virtio draft III
|
To: |
Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/3] Virtio draft III |
|
From: |
Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:48:01 +1000 |
|
Cc: |
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen Mailing List <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "jmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <jmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, kvm-devel <kvm-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, virtualization <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christian Borntraeger <cborntra@xxxxxxxxxx>, Latchesar Ionkov <lionkov@xxxxxxxx>, Suzanne McIntosh <skranjac@xxxxxxxxxx>, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Mon, 18 Jun 2007 00:46:30 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<467541DF.5060907@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<1181217762.14054.192.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1181999552.6237.255.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <467541DF.5060907@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 17:14 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
> > In this episode, Rusty tries to NAPI-ize the driver and discovers that
> > virtio callbacks are a bad idea: NAPI needs to turn interrupts off and
> > still be able to query for new incoming packets.
> >
> > Changes to core:
> > 1) Back to "interrupt" model with get_inbuf()/get_outbuf() calls.
> >
>
> Seems to be these are just two different ways of iterating over the
> pending buffers, and one could be implemented in terms of the other in a
> few lines. I think that new new way is better, though, due to less
> indirection.
Yes, the lguest implementation points them to a common routine. We
could do some batching here too, but it seemed like premature
optimization.
> btw, I'm not sure that the name 'virtio' is correct. Probably any
> network or block driver which has support for batching (the vast
> majority) could use this to good effect.
Trying to avoid boiling the ocean 8)
Cheers,
Rusty.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home