From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Lztim-0003jT-QB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 May 2009 10:28:12 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Lztih-0003jH-H6
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 May 2009 10:28:11 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58076 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Lztih-0003jE-5r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 May 2009 10:28:07 -0400
Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.210]:51147)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA1:24) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <hch@lst.de>) id 1Lztig-00019k-F2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 May 2009 10:28:06 -0400
Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 16:28:00 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] virtio-blk: add SGI_IO passthru support
Message-ID: <20090501142800.GA11427@lst.de>
References: <20090427082606.GA32604@lst.de>
	<200904291237.21558.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<20090430201350.GA30619@lst.de>
	<200904302249.20940.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<20090501072449.GA21867@lst.de>
	<20090501110805.GA15311@shareable.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090501110805.GA15311@shareable.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: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>

On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 12:08:06PM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> If you're using virtio-block to connect to lots of LUNs on lots of
> targets (i.e. lots of block devices), don't you need similar queuing
> code and error handling for all that too?

Currenly there's a 1:1 relation of virtio drivers and virtio queues.

Note that I don't argue against virtio-scsi, I brought this up first.
I just thing that virtio-blk is actually nicer for some use cases.
(and of course we'll have to keep it for backwards compatiblity anyway)