From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1J2GLH-0005U8-Oa
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:24:55 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1J2GLH-0005Su-1w
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:24:55 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J2GLG-0005Sj-Vn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:24:54 -0500
Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>) id 1J2GLG-00067Y-KN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:24:54 -0500
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/3] virtio network device
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:24:38 +1100
References: <4755CC8C.6000001@us.ibm.com>
	<20071208215510.GB30486@shareable.org>
	<475B1488.5040200@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <475B1488.5040200@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200712121224.38403.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>

On Sunday 09 December 2007 09:02:48 Anthony Liguori wrote:
> If QEMU ever got true SMP support, then virtio would not work as it
> requires 16-bit atomic writes which AFAIK is not possible on a number of
> non-x86 architectures.

Hmm?  Where is this requirement coming from?

I think everyone should stop using the word "atomic" in virtio discussions; 
it's confusing.

Rusty.