Il 06/05/2013 16:05, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> Also, memory_region_find cannot know if it's returning a valid result,
>> and the callee cannot check it because the region may have disappeared
>> already when it is returned.
>
> Again, we hold the address space lock while checking the conditions. I
On 2013-05-06 15:09, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 06/05/2013 14:06, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> On 2013-05-06 13:47, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Il 06/05/2013 13:39, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
On 2013-05-06 13:28, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 06/05/2013 13:11, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> On 2013-05-06
Il 06/05/2013 14:06, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
> On 2013-05-06 13:47, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 06/05/2013 13:39, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>>> On 2013-05-06 13:28, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 06/05/2013 13:11, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
> On 2013-05-06 12:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 06/05/2013
On 2013-05-06 13:47, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 06/05/2013 13:39, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> On 2013-05-06 13:28, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Il 06/05/2013 13:11, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
On 2013-05-06 12:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 06/05/2013 12:56, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>>> The problem i
Il 06/05/2013 13:39, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
> On 2013-05-06 13:28, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 06/05/2013 13:11, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>>> On 2013-05-06 12:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 06/05/2013 12:56, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> The problem is that even if I/O for a region is supposed to ha
On 2013-05-06 13:28, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 06/05/2013 13:11, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> On 2013-05-06 12:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Il 06/05/2013 12:56, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
> The problem is that even if I/O for a region is supposed to happen
> within the BQL, lookup can happen outsi
Il 06/05/2013 13:11, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
> On 2013-05-06 12:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 06/05/2013 12:56, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
The problem is that even if I/O for a region is supposed to happen
within the BQL, lookup can happen outside the BQL. Lookup will use the
region eve
On 2013-05-06 12:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 06/05/2013 12:56, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>>> The problem is that even if I/O for a region is supposed to happen
>>> within the BQL, lookup can happen outside the BQL. Lookup will use the
>>> region even if it is just to discard it:
>>>
>>>
Il 06/05/2013 12:56, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> The problem is that even if I/O for a region is supposed to happen
>> within the BQL, lookup can happen outside the BQL. Lookup will use the
>> region even if it is just to discard it:
>>
>>VCPU thread (under BQL) device threa
On 2013-05-06 12:27, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 06/05/2013 10:40, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>
>>>
>>> [*] The "subscriber link" mechanism allows an LWN.net
>>> subscriber to generate a special URL for a
>>> subscription-only article. That URL can then be given to
>>> ot
Il 06/05/2013 10:40, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>>
>> [*] The "subscriber link" mechanism allows an LWN.net
>> subscriber to generate a special URL for a
>> subscription-only article. That URL can then be given to
>> others, who will be able to access the article re
On 2013-05-06 10:07, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 04/05/2013 12:42, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> On 2013-05-04 11:47, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Il 03/05/2013 10:04, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
We can't change the semantics of opaque as long as old_mmio /
old_portio are around. But we need a flag anyw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Il 04/05/2013 12:42, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
> On 2013-05-04 11:47, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 03/05/2013 10:04, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>>> We can't change the semantics of opaque as long as old_mmio /
>>> old_portio are around. But we need a flag anywa
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-05-03 09:37, liu ping fan wrote:
>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> Hi Pingfan,
>>>
>>> On 2012-12-06 08:28, liu ping fan wrote:
Any suggestion? Or new design idea for this?
>>>
>>> Finally... I'm getting back
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 03/05/2013 10:04, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> We can't change the semantics of opaque as long as old_mmio / old_portio
>> are around. But we need a flag anyway to indicate if a region is
>> depending on BQL or not. Adding a separate "Object *
On 2013-05-04 11:47, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 03/05/2013 10:04, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> We can't change the semantics of opaque as long as old_mmio / old_portio
>> are around. But we need a flag anyway to indicate if a region is
>> depending on BQL or not. Adding a separate "Object *owner" to
>>
Il 03/05/2013 10:04, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
> We can't change the semantics of opaque as long as old_mmio / old_portio
> are around. But we need a flag anyway to indicate if a region is
> depending on BQL or not. Adding a separate "Object *owner" to
> MemoryRegion can serve both purposes. Then we d
On 2013-05-03 09:37, liu ping fan wrote:
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Hi Pingfan,
>>
>> On 2012-12-06 08:28, liu ping fan wrote:
>>> Any suggestion? Or new design idea for this?
>>
>> Finally... I'm getting back to this. I'm currently trying to make use of
>> this series
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Hi Pingfan,
>
> On 2012-12-06 08:28, liu ping fan wrote:
>> Any suggestion? Or new design idea for this?
>
> Finally... I'm getting back to this. I'm currently trying to make use of
> this series, adapting it to my needs (selective BQL-free disp
On 2013-05-02 18:58, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Hi Pingfan,
>
> On 2012-12-06 08:28, liu ping fan wrote:
>> Any suggestion? Or new design idea for this?
>
> Finally... I'm getting back to this. I'm currently trying to make use of
> this series, adapting it to my needs (selective BQL-free dispatching of
Hi Pingfan,
On 2012-12-06 08:28, liu ping fan wrote:
> Any suggestion? Or new design idea for this?
Finally... I'm getting back to this. I'm currently trying to make use of
this series, adapting it to my needs (selective BQL-free dispatching of
PIO regions).
Is there a newer version available on
Any suggestion? Or new design idea for this?
Thanks
Pingfan
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
> From: Liu Ping Fan
>
> v1:
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-07/msg03312.html
>
> v2:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-08/msg01275.html
>
> v
From: Liu Ping Fan
v1:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-07/msg03312.html
v2:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-08/msg01275.html
v3:
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-09/msg01474.html
v4:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-10/m
23 matches
Mail list logo
