From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 7/9] Virtual network guest device driver Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 11:49:14 -0500 Message-ID: <4647418A.2040201@codemonkey.ws> References: <1178903957.25135.13.camel@cotte.boeblingen.de.ibm.com><1178904965.25135.34.camel@cotte.boeblingen.de.ibm.com><13426df10705111244w1578ebedy8259bc42ca1f588d@mail.gmail.com> <46457EF9.2070706@de.ibm.com> <64F9B87B6B770947A9F8391472E032160BC74612@ehost011-8.exch011.intermedia.net> <4647257F.4020900@codemonkey.ws> <64F9B87B6B770947A9F8391472E032160BC74675@ehost011-8.exch011.intermedia.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jimi Xenidis , Christian Borntraeger , jmk-zzFmDc4TPjtKvsKVC3L/VUEOCMrvLtNR@public.gmane.org, carsteno-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, mschwid2-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org, kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: Dor Laor Return-path: In-Reply-To: <64F9B87B6B770947A9F8391472E032160BC74675-yEcIvxbTEBqsx+V+t5oei8rau4O3wl8o3fe8/T/H7NteoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Dor Laor wrote: > Furthermore, > >> the plan is to completely rearchitect the netback/netfront protocol for >> the next Xen release (this effort is referred to netchannel2). >> > > But isn't Jeremy Fitzhardinge is pushing big patch queue into the > kernel? > Yes, but it's not in the kernel yet and there's no guarantee it'll get there in time for KVM's consumption. > If we manage to plant hooks into the netback/front for using net_ops, > they and the code will get into the kernel they will be have to keep the > hooks for netchannel2. > > >> See some of the XenSummit slides as to why this is necessary. >> > > It's looks like generalizing all the level 0,1,2 features plus > performance optimizations. It's not something we couldn't upgrade to. > I'm curious what Rusty thinks as I do not know nearly enough about the networking subsystem to make an educated statement here. Would it be better to just try and generalize netback/netfront or build something from scratch? Could the lguest driver be generalized more easily? Regards, Anthony LIguori >> Regards, >> >> Anthony Liguori >> >> >>> It is optimized, and support tso. >>> By adding a generic ops calls we can make enjoy all the above. >>> >>> Using Xen's core PV code doesn't imply that we will have their >>> > interface > >>> {xenstore} the interface creation and tear-down would be kvm >>> > specific. > >>> They could even have a plain directory structure. >>> >>> >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > - > >>> This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express >>> Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take >>> control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. >>> http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> kvm-devel mailing list >>> kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel >>> >>> >>> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/