[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC] pass write value to in_range pointers
Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/23/2009 02:44 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:04:06AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>>>> It will also need to support
>>>>> multiple matches.
>>>> What, signal many fds on the same address/value pair?
>>>> I see this as a bug. Why is this a good thing to support?
>>>> Just increases the chance of leaking this fd.
>>> I believe Avi asked for this feature specifically, so I will defer
>>> to him.
>> Hmm. That's hard to implement in my model. Avi, can we give up
>> this feature? I don't think anyone needs this specifically ...
> I think we can make do with passing that single eventfd to multiple
> consumers. It means their event count reads may return zero, but I
> guess we can live with that.
> I do want to retain flexibility in how we route events.

Ok, so for now I will just crank up the io_bus array, and we can address
scale another day. Can I just drop patch 2/3 and let the io_bus govern
the limit?


[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-23 14:05    [W:0.058 / U:8.844 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site