ons(-)
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>
This is a nice improvement, thank you!
Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 10:40:44AM +, Peter-Jan Gootzen wrote:
> On Wed, 2024-05-29 at 14:32 -0400, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 05:52:07PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > Virtiofs has its own queing mechanism, but still requests are first
> &g
On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 04:56:14PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 3:44 PM Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 11:06:19AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 at 10:53, Peter-Jan Gootzen
> > > wrote:
On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 11:06:19AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 at 10:53, Peter-Jan Gootzen wrote:
>
> > We also considered this idea, it would kind of be like locking FUSE into
> > being x86. However I think this is not backwards compatible. Currently
> > an ARM64 client
rio where directly
dispatching requests to virtqueues is a problem.
Is there someone who can run single and multiqueue virtiofs performance
benchmarks?
Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
es
> virtio-fs: add multi-queue support
>
> fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c | 73 ++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ootzen
> Signed-off-by: Yoray Zack
> Suggested-by: Max Gurtovoy
> Reviewed-by: Max Gurtovoy
> ---
> fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
