On Fri, 11/04 11:03, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 10:58:04AM +0000, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 04:04:50PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote: > > > The option specifies how many threads to spawn under the iothread > > > object. All threads share the same AioContext so they can safely run > > > (contend) together. > > > > > > With AioContext going away, the spawns will natually enable the block > > > multi-queue work. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng <f...@redhat.com> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Based on v2 of Paolo's RFifoLock removal series, with which the > > > symmetric contention on the single AioContext is no longer a busy > > > preempt loop. > > > --- > > > include/sysemu/iothread.h | 19 ++++-- > > > iothread.c | 148 > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ > > > 2 files changed, 125 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-) > > > > I'm not happy with "IOThread" becoming a group of threads. IOThread > > should stay the way it is. Instead you should add a new object type > > that simply groups IOThreads for convenient assignment to devices, e.g. > > IOThreadGroup. Then multiqueue devices can use an IOThreadGroup to work > > inside multiple IOThreads. > > Do we even need a IOThreadGroup object ? Can't we just explicitly pass > a list of IOThread object IDs to the device. eg something like > > -device virtio-blk-pci,iothread=t1,iothread=t2,iothread=t3
Is that a supported syntax by qdev/QOM? Fam
