Re: [PATCH 1/5] Support more than 3.5GB with virtio (v3)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> We're pretty sloppy in virtio right now about phys_ram_base 
>> assumptions.  This
>> patch is an incremental step between what we have today and a full 
>> blown DMA
>> API.  I backported the DMA API but the performance impact was not 
>> acceptable
>> to me. There's only a slight performance impact with this particular 
>> patch.
>> Since we're no longer assuming guest physical memory is contiguous, 
>> we need
>> a more complex way to validate the memory regions than just checking 
>> if it's
>> within ram_size.
> Applied patches 1-2.  Since patch 4 is under contention on qemu-devel, 
> and 3 and 5 depend on it, I'd like to get the can_receive semantic 
> change accepted first.

I'll send it upstream, but I think it's much less of a divergence than 
the current virtio_net_poll hacks.


Anthony Liguori

This email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
kvm-devel mailing list

[Site Home]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Virtualization]     [LVS Devel]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Memory]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Rubini]     [100% Free Internet Dating]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux Resources]

Powered by Linux