From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47461)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mlin@kernel.org>) id 1a1fAC-0006Mc-Lu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:51:33 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mlin@kernel.org>) id 1a1fA9-00086e-Cq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:51:32 -0500
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:42761)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mlin@kernel.org>) id 1a1fA9-00086Y-6v
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:51:29 -0500
Message-ID: <1448477482.6540.3.camel@ssi>
From: Ming Lin <mlin@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:51:22 -0800
In-Reply-To: <56559B36.90406@redhat.com>
References: <1447978868-17138-1-git-send-email-mlin@kernel.org>
	<56506D95.70101@redhat.com> <1448266667.18175.5.camel@hasee>
	<56531F5F.3050709@redhat.com> <1448350074.6696.3.camel@hasee>
	<56544122.3010300@redhat.com> <1448393115.2925.2.camel@ssi>
	<56559B36.90406@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/9] vhost-nvme: new qemu nvme backend
 using nvme target
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org

On Wed, 2015-11-25 at 12:27 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Do you still have a blk_set_aio_context somewhere?  I'm losing track of
> the changes.

No.

> 
> In any case, I think using a separate I/O thread is a bit premature,
> except for benchmarking.  In the meanwhile I think the best option is to
> post a two-patch series with the vendor extension and the ioeventfd
> respectively.

I'll post.

BTW, I'm not sure about qemu upstream policy.
Do I need to first make the kernel side patch upstream?
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mlin/linux.git/log/?h=nvme-google-ext

I think the kernel side patch will take a bit longer time to upstream.

> 
> Paolo