From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: question on virtio
Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 23:59:27 +0300
Message-ID: <20100505205927.GA7111@redhat.com>
References: <20100505110947.GA27872@redhat.com> <4BE1C99F.6050205@codemonkey.ws>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42974 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751796Ab0EEVEG (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 5 May 2010 17:04:06 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4BE1C99F.6050205@codemonkey.ws>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 02:40:15PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 05/05/2010 06:09 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> Hi!
>> I see this in virtio_ring.c:
>>
>>          /* Put entry in available array (but don't update avail->idx *
>> 	   until they do sync). */
>>
>> Why is it done this way?
>> It seems that updating the index straight away would be simpler, while
>> this might allow the host to specilatively look up the buffer and handle
>> it, without waiting for the kick.
>>    
>
> It should be okay as long as you don't update idx for partial vectors.
>
> Regards,
>
> Anthony Liguori

Sorry, what do you mean by partial vectors here?