[tip:core/rcu] drivers/vhost: Replace synchronize_rcu_bh() with synchronize_rcu()

Commit-ID: d05faa5f1ac50beef77b4ceba0e8e157d41146e2 Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/d05faa5f1ac50beef77b4ceba0e8e157d41146e2 Author: Paul E. McKenney AuthorDate: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 17:14:53 -0800 Committer: Paul E. McKenney CommitDate: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 09:21:37 -0800 drivers/vhost

[tip:core/rcu] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant read_barrier_depends()

Commit-ID: 3a5db0b108e0a40f08c2bcff6a675dbf632b91e0 Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/3a5db0b108e0a40f08c2bcff6a675dbf632b91e0 Author: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> AuthorDate: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 09:45:10 -0800 Committer: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vne

Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 21/21] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant read_barrier_depends()

On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:09:36AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:57:00PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 11:24:49PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > READ_ONCE is really all over the place (some code literally replaced all > > > memory

Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 21/21] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant read_barrier_depends()

On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 11:43:41PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 01:36:44PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 11:24:49PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:08:01PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wro

Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 21/21] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant read_barrier_depends()

On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 11:24:49PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:08:01PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:51:48PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 11:33:39AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wro

Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 21/21] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant read_barrier_depends()

On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:51:48PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 11:33:39AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:24:21PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: [ . . . ] > > > and this barrier is no longer paired with anythi

Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 21/21] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant read_barrier_depends()

On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:24:21PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 08:17:33PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 08:57:46PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > I don't see WRITE_ONCE inserting any barriers, release or > > > write. > > > >

[PATCH tip/core/rcu 21/21] drivers/vhost: Remove now-redundant read_barrier_depends()

Because READ_ONCE() now implies read_barrier_depends(), the read_barrier_depends() in next_desc() is now redundant. This commit therefore removes it and the related comments. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.

Re: [PATCH] documentation: Add disclaimer

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 02:57:07PM +, David Howells wrote: > Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > +== > > +DISCLAIMER > > +== > > + > > +This document is not a specification; it is intentionally (for the sake of > > +brevity) and unintentionally (due to being

Re: [PATCH] documentation: Add disclaimer

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 09:35:46AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:11:43PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > So Peter, would you like to update your patch to include yourself > > and Will as authors? > > Sure, here goes. > > --- > Subject:

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:04:47AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 03:29:21PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 02:33:40PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Linus Torvalds > > > <torva.

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:25:46AM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:58:20AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:16:09PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:03:22PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH] documentation: Add disclaimer

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 02:57:07PM +, David Howells wrote: > Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > +== > > +DISCLAIMER > > +== > > + > > +This document is not a specification; it is intentionally (for the sake of > > +brevity) and unintentionally (due to being

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:16:09PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:03:22PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:42:43PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > >

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

; + > > > > LINUX KERNEL MEMORY BARRIERS > > > > @@ -5,6 +6,22 @@ > > By: David Howells <dhowe...@redhat.com> > > Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > &g

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:19:27AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:03:22PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:42:43PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 12:52:07AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 07:46:29AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 04:19:29PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > > > Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:44:46AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > This is distinct from: > > That may be distinct, but: > > > struct foo *x = READ_ONCE(*ptr); > > smp_read_barrier_depends(); > >

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 02:33:40PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Linus Torvalds > wrote: > > > > You might as well just write it as > > > > struct foo x = READ_ONCE(*ptr); > > x->bar = 5; > > > > because that

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:10:10PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 05:06:46PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 02:41:34PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:28:45AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 03:45:23PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney > <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > No trailing data-dependent read, so agreed, no smp_read_barrier_depends() > > needed. That said, I be

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 02:41:34PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:28:45AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:54:01AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:24:32AM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > >

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 06:02:34PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:39:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:55:54AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:29:13PM -0800, Paul E. Mc

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:42:43PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:27:14PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:46:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 04:19:29PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > You could use SYNC_ACQUIRE() to implement read_barrier_depends() and > > smp_read_barrier_depends(), but SYNC_RMB probably does

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:55:54AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:29:13PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > So smp_mb() provides transitivity, as do pairs of smp_store_release() > > and smp_read_acquire(), > > But they provide different grades o

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:13:48AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:55:54AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:29:13PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > So smp_mb() provides transitivity, as do pairs of

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:24:32AM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 02:55:10PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:36:50PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > > > On 01/14/2016 01:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > >

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:54:01AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:24:32AM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 02:55:10PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:36:50PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > >

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:27:14PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:46:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:13:48AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > And the stuff we're confused about is how best to e

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:29:12PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:39:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Should we start putting litmus tests for the various examples > > somewhere, perhaps in a litmus-tests directory within each participating >

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:04:45PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 12:58:22PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > > On 01/13/2016 12:48 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > >On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:02:35AM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > > > > > >>I ask HW team about it but I have a

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:36:50PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > On 01/14/2016 01:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > >>On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >>> > >>>The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not requ

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:45:44PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > On 01/14/2016 01:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:46:43PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > >>On 01/14/2016 12:15 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >>>On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 03:33:40PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > On 01/14/2016 02:55 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >OK, so it looks like Will was asking not about WRC+addr+addr, but instead > >about WRC+sync+addr. > (He actually asked twice about this and that too but skip

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:24:34PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > On 01/14/2016 12:48 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > >So SYNC_RMB is intended to implement smp_rmb(), correct? > Yes. > > > >You could use SYNC_ACQUIRE() to implement read_barrier_depends() a

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:46:43PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > On 01/14/2016 12:15 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:42:02AM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > >>An the only point - please use an appropriate SYNC_* barriers instead of > >>heavy bold hammer. That stuff was

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:01:05PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > I need some time to understand your test examples. However, Understood. > On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > >The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:12:53PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > On 01/14/2016 04:04 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > >Consequently, it's important that the architecture back-ends > >implement these portable primitives (e.g. smp_mb()) in a way that > >satisfies the kernel memory model so that core code

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:28:18AM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > On 01/14/2016 04:14 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > >On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 02:26:16PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > > > >> Moreover, there are voices against guarantee that it will be in future > >>and that voices point me to

Re: [v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 09:15:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:42:02AM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > > An the only point - please use an appropriate SYNC_* barriers instead of > > heavy bold hammer. That stuff was design explicitly to support the > > requirements of

Re: [PATCH v3 01/41] lcoking/barriers, arch: Use smp barriers in smp_store_release()

ad.org> > Cc: <linux-a...@vger.kernel.org> > Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> > Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org> > Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carst...@de.ibm.com> > Cc: Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org> >

Re: [PATCH v3 05/41] powerpc: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

ic/barrier.h instead. > > This is in preparation to refactoring this code area. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> Looks sane to me. Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> &g

Re: [PATCH v5 0/8] qspinlock: a 4-byte queue spinlock with PV support

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:14:20AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: This series passes a short locktorture test when based on top of current tip/core/locking. This is for both the first three patches and for the full set, though in the latter case it took me an embarrassingly large number of tries to

Re: [PATCH v8 1/5] mm: introduce a common interface for balloon pages mobility

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 05:20:11PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 09:47 -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote: + mapping = rcu_access_pointer(page-mapping); + if (mapping) + mapping = mapping-assoc_mapping; The comment near rcu_access_pointer()

Re: [net-next RFC PATCH 4/7] tuntap: multiqueue support

On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 09:55:20AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: With the abstraction that each socket were a backend of a queue for userspace, this patch adds multiqueue support for tap device by allowing multiple sockets to be attached to a tap device. Then we could parallize the transmission by

Re: [PATCH] vhost: rcu annotation fixup

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 01:08:45PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: When built with rcu checks enabled, vhost triggers bogus warnings as vhost features are read without dev-mutex sometimes. Fixing it properly is not trivial as vhost.h does not know which lockdep classes it will be used under.

Re: [PATCH] vhost: rcu annotation fixup

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 07:55:00PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:48:34AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 01:08:45PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: When built with rcu checks enabled, vhost triggers bogus warnings as vhost features

Re: [PATCH] vhost: rcu annotation fixup

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:10:31PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:02:33AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 07:55:00PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:48:34AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2011

Re: [PATCH 1/2] vhost test module

On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 03:56:56PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 01:18:18AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 03:13:03PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 09:47:09PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2010

Re: [PATCH 1/2] vhost test module

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 07:09:01PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: This adds a test module for vhost infrastructure. Intentionally not tied to kbuild to prevent people from installing and loading it accidentally. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com On question below. ---

Re: [PATCH 1/2] vhost test module

On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 09:11:30PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 11:00:37AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 07:09:01PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: This adds a test module for vhost infrastructure. Intentionally not tied to kbuild

Re: [PATCH 1/2] vhost test module

On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 01:18:18AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 03:13:03PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 09:47:09PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 11:26:16AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Thu, Dec 02, 2010

Re: [PATCHv7 3/3] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server

On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 02:39:59PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 03:00:07 am Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 03:31:20PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: But it's still nasty to use half an API. If it were a few places I would have open-coded it with a comment

Re: [PATCHv7 3/3] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 01:57:29PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 03:57:44PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 01:14:06PM -0500, Gregory Haskins wrote: Gregory Haskins wrote: Eric Dumazet wrote: Michael S. Tsirkin a écrit : +static

Re: [PATCHv7 3/3] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server

On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 01:14:06PM -0500, Gregory Haskins wrote: Gregory Haskins wrote: Eric Dumazet wrote: Michael S. Tsirkin a écrit : +static void handle_tx(struct vhost_net *net) +{ + struct vhost_virtqueue *vq = net-dev.vqs[VHOST_NET_VQ_TX]; + unsigned head, out, in, s; +

Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 04:25:40PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 09:01:35AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote: I think I understand what your comment above meant: You don't need to do synchronize_rcu() because you can flush the workqueue instead to ensure that all

Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:15:59PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 07:11:07AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 04:25:40PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 09:01:35AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote: I think I understand

Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 06:51:54PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 08:26:39AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:15:59PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 07:11:07AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009

Re: [PATCH 2/2] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:53:40PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: What it is: vhost net is a character device that can be used to reduce the number of system calls involved in virtio networking. Existing virtio net code is used in the guest without modification. There's similarity with