[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [virtio] [PATCH] ccw: split descriptor/available/used rings
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> writes: > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 03:54:51PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 15:39:25 +0200 >> Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> wrote: >> >> > On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 16:07:18 +0300 >> > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> > > If we want drivers to do something we really must write it >> > > explicitly. >> > > >> > >> >> OK, here's what I've got: >> >> commit 5a36ad2c5826ccf777d12b2183efc265c51015b0 >> Author: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> >> Date: Tue Oct 8 15:49:36 2013 +0200 >> >> virtio-ccw: clarify sense id operation >> >> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> > > Looks good to me. > Only, please tweak subject next time you send a patch please :) > It should look like this: And feel free to commit this kind of clarification straight to the repository. Back to the actual subject of splitting the rings: we've already removed the assumption that they will be contiguous from the core of the spec, but that does not mean transports need to do the same. The effect is to increase the ring size when large contiguous memory ranges can't be obtained (eg. hotplug on long-running kernels). (PAGESIZE=4096, ALIGN=4096) Contiguous Pages Max Qsz (unsplit) Max Qsz (split) 1 None 256 2 128 512 3 256 512 4 512 1024 5 512 1024 6 512 1024 7 1024 1024 8 1024 2048 If this doesn't matter to you, it's almost certainly not worth the hassle of changing. Cheers, Rusty. PS. I note that you expose KVM_VIRTIO_CCW_RING_ALIGN through uapi: that seems unnecessary?
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]