From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758280AbbCDOTz (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Mar 2015 09:19:55 -0500 Received: from smtp02.citrix.com ([66.165.176.63]:45294 "EHLO SMTP02.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752207AbbCDOTy (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Mar 2015 09:19:54 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.09,687,1418083200"; d="scan'208";a="241363819" Message-ID: <54F71468.3030207@citrix.com> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 14:19:20 +0000 From: David Vrabel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Juergen Gross , David Vrabel , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] usb: Introduce Xen pvUSB backend References: <1424957717-392-1-git-send-email-jgross@suse.com> <1424957717-392-4-git-send-email-jgross@suse.com> <54F44BD5.1030008@citrix.com> <54F7091C.1050001@suse.com> <54F70E3D.20201@citrix.com> <54F71221.6050800@suse.com> In-Reply-To: <54F71221.6050800@suse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DLP: MIA1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/03/15 14:09, Juergen Gross wrote: > > The main question whether it is worth to consider this alternative is > the performance aspect. Does anyone have an idea which USB devices would > typically be used via pvusb? I'd suspect memory sticks and USB disks > and perhaps webcams being the most performance relevant ones. Is an > additional copy operation of user data acceptable here? I have no idea. We (XenServer) have no use cases at all for USB device passthrough. David From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Vrabel Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] usb: Introduce Xen pvUSB backend Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 14:19:20 +0000 Message-ID: <54F71468.3030207@citrix.com> References: <1424957717-392-1-git-send-email-jgross@suse.com> <1424957717-392-4-git-send-email-jgross@suse.com> <54F44BD5.1030008@citrix.com> <54F7091C.1050001@suse.com> <54F70E3D.20201@citrix.com> <54F71221.6050800@suse.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <54F71221.6050800-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-usb-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Juergen Gross , David Vrabel , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, xen-devel-GuqFBffKawuULHF6PoxzQEEOCMrvLtNR@public.gmane.org, konrad.wilk-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, boris.ostrovsky-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, linux-usb-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, cyliu-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 04/03/15 14:09, Juergen Gross wrote: > > The main question whether it is worth to consider this alternative is > the performance aspect. Does anyone have an idea which USB devices would > typically be used via pvusb? I'd suspect memory sticks and USB disks > and perhaps webcams being the most performance relevant ones. Is an > additional copy operation of user data acceptable here? I have no idea. We (XenServer) have no use cases at all for USB device passthrough. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html