From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: Using virtio as a physical (wire-level) transport Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 14:19:36 +0300 Message-ID: <20100906111936.GB15608@redhat.com> References: <20100804230441.GJ23951@ovro.caltech.edu> <20100805213050.GA24984@redhat.com> <20100805230102.GD4757@ovro.caltech.edu> <20100805232042.GA27651@redhat.com> <20100806153427.GB12392@ovro.caltech.edu> <4C336074-FC8C-4BDF-B945-5295133CDB38@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Ira W. Snyder" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Zang Roy , "virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org" To: Alexander Graf Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1736 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751911Ab0IFLZr (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Sep 2010 07:25:47 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C336074-FC8C-4BDF-B945-5295133CDB38@suse.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 07:34:19AM -0400, Alexander Graf wrote: > I'd vote for defining virtio v2 that makes everything LE. Maybe we > could even have an LE capability with a grace period of phasing out > non-LE capable hosts and guests. So there are multiple ideas floating for modifying the ring, and together they might warrant virtio2. This includes removing available ring, publishing consumer indexes, possibly some interrupt mitigation ideas, and we can put endian-ness there. -- MST