>> +/* The structure to notify the virtqueue for async socket */
>> +struct vhost_notifier {
>> + struct list_head list;
> >+ struct vhost_virtqueue *vq;
> >+ int head;
> >+ int size;
> >+ int log;
> >+ void *ctrl;
> >+ void (*dtor)(struct vhost_notifier *);
> >+};
> >+
>So IMO, this is not the best interface between vhost
>and your driver, exposing them to each other unnecessarily.
>
>If you think about it, your driver should not care about this structure.
>It could get e.g. a kiocb (sendmsg already gets one), and call ki_dtor
>on completion. vhost could save it's state in ki_user_data. If your
>driver needs to add more data to do more tracking, I think it can put
>skb pointer in the private pointer.
Then if I remove the struct vhost_notifier, and just use struct kiocb, but
don't use the one got from sendmsg or recvmsg, but allocated within the
page_info structure, and don't implement any aio logic related to it, is that
ok?
Sorry, I made a patch, but don't know how to reply mail with a good formatted
patch here....
Thanks
Xiaohui
--
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
