lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 00/17] virtual-bus
    Gregory Haskins wrote:
    > Avi Kivity wrote:
    >
    >> Gregory Haskins wrote:
    >>
    >>> Rusty Russell wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> On Thursday 02 April 2009 21:36:07 Gregory Haskins wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> You do not need to know when the packet is copied (which I currently
    >>>>> do). You only need it for zero-copy (of which I would like to
    >>>>> support,
    >>>>> but as I understand it there are problems with the reliability of
    >>>>> proper
    >>>>> callback (i.e. skb->destructor).
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> But if you have a UP guest,
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> I assume you mean UP host ;)
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >> I think Rusty did mean a UP guest, and without schedule-and-forget.
    >>
    > That doesnt make sense to me, tho. All the testing I did was a UP
    > guest, actually. Why would I be constrained to run without the
    > scheduling unless the host was also UP?
    >

    You aren't constrained. And your numbers show it works.

    >>
    >> The problem is that we already have virtio guest drivers going several
    >> kernel versions back, as well as Windows drivers. We can't keep
    >> changing the infrastructure under people's feet.
    >>
    >
    > Well, IIUC the virtio code itself declares the ABI as unstable, so there
    > technically *is* an out if we really wanted one. But I certainly
    > understand the desire to not change this ABI if at all possible, and
    > thus the resistance here.
    >

    virtio is a stable ABI.

    > However, theres still the possibility we can make this work in an ABI
    > friendly way with cap-bits, or other such features. For instance, the
    > virtio-net driver could register both with pci and vbus-proxy and
    > instantiate a device with a slightly different ops structure for each or
    > something. Alternatively we could write a host-side shim to expose vbus
    > devices as pci devices or something like that.
    >

    Sounds complicated...

    --
    error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-04-02 15:31    [W:0.022 / U:126.312 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site