Re: [PATCH RFC] pass write value to in_range pointers

Gregory Haskins
2009-06-23T12:02:20Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1087 bytes --]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/23/2009 02:44 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:04:06AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>
>>>>> It will also need to support
>>>>> multiple matches.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> What, signal many fds on the same address/value pair?
>>>> I see this as a bug. Why is this a good thing to support?
>>>> Just increases the chance of leaking this fd.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I believe Avi asked for this feature specifically, so I will defer
>>> to him.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm. That's hard to implement in my model. Avi, can we give up
>> this feature? I don't think anyone needs this specifically ...
>>
>
> I think we can make do with passing that single eventfd to multiple
> consumers. It means their event count reads may return zero, but I
> guess we can live with that.
>
> I do want to retain flexibility in how we route events.
>

Ok, so for now I will just crank up the io_bus array, and we can address
scale another day. Can I just drop patch 2/3 and let the io_bus govern
the limit?

-Greg

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 266 bytes --]