From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: KVM call agenda for Apr 27 Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 14:11:40 +0300 Message-ID: <20100427111140.GF10044@redhat.com> References: <20100426172634.GC15278@x200.localdomain> <4BD5D28C.7080700@codemonkey.ws> <20100426221258.GH15278@x200.localdomain> <4BD61584.9080208@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Chris Wright , kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org To: Anthony Liguori Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9987 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751228Ab0D0LLq (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2010 07:11:46 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BD61584.9080208@codemonkey.ws> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 05:36:52PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 04/26/2010 05:12 PM, Chris Wright wrote: > >* Anthony Liguori (anthony@codemonkey.ws) wrote: > >>On 04/26/2010 12:26 PM, Chris Wright wrote: > >>>Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering. > >>> > >>>While I don't expect it to be the case this week, if we have a > >>>lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call. > >>- qemu management interface (and libvirt) > >>- stable tree policy (push vs. pull and call for stable volunteers) > >block plug in (follow-on from qmp block watermark) > > A few comments: > > 1) The problem was not block watermark itself but generating a > notification on the watermark threshold. It's a heuristic and > should be implemented based on polling block stats. Otherwise, > we'll be adding tons of events to qemu that we'll struggle to > maintain. > Network cards have low number of rx/tx buffers interrupt. This is also heuristic. Do you think driver should poll for this event instead and NIC designers just wasted their time designing the feature? -- Gleb.