Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 06:18:01PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
But I don't understand how aio will make implementing it easier -
or are you merely saying that it will make it worthwhile?
If you have aio, the the NIC and the guest proceed in parallel. If the
guest is faster (likely), then when it sends the next packet it will see
that interrupts are disabled and not notify again. Once aio complete we
can recheck the queue; if it's empty we reenable notifications. If
there's still stuff in it we submit it with notifications disabled.
So you are saying that with aio we won't need this optimization at all?
I guess it's late in the day, and my mind is fuzzy...
No, I'm saying with aio the optimization becomes worthwhile. But I
joined late in the thread so we may be talking about different things.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
