From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] virtio scsi host draft specification, v2
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 14:56:04 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110602115604.GD7141@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DE7773B.7060106@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 02:42:51PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 01:42 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 05:51:54PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >> On 06/01/2011 05:36 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> So, if I am going to give this liberty with buffers to the driver, I
> >> >> _have_ to keep the size information. Otherwise, I agree that it is
> >> >> redundant and I will remove it. What poison do you prefer?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Ah, I think I understand now. Both sense and data have in
> >> >fields that might only be used partially?
> >> >In that case I think I agree: it's best to require the use of separate
> >> >buffers for them, in this way used len will give you useful information
> >> >and you won't need sense_len and data_len: just a flag to
> >> >mark the fact that there *is* a sense buffer following.
> >> >And the num field does that.
> >>
> >>
> >> Do you mean to use the virtio iovec length to determine information
> >> about the message (like splitting it into buffers)?
> >
> >Exactly the reverse :)
>
> They're both equally bad.
>
> >> I think that's a bad idea. Splitting into buffers is a function of
> >> memory management. For example, a driver in userspace (or a nested
> >> guest) will have additional fragmentation into 4K pages after it
> >> passes through the iommu.
> >>
> >> Let's not mix layers here.
> >
> >Right. If there are two buffers of variable length there
> >should be two add_buf calls.
>
> No. The guest should be free to use one large continuous buffer of
> size N, of N buffers of size 1.
That's exactly what I was saying.
> --
> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-02 11:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-20 8:21 [Qemu-devel] virtio scsi host draft specification, v2 Paolo Bonzini
2011-05-28 19:33 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2011-05-30 9:22 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-06-01 4:44 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2011-06-01 8:49 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-06-01 11:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-06-01 12:51 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-06-01 13:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-06-01 14:36 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-06-01 14:51 ` Avi Kivity
2011-06-02 10:42 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-06-02 11:42 ` Avi Kivity
2011-06-02 11:56 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2011-06-02 12:18 ` Avi Kivity
2011-06-01 15:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-06-02 11:41 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-06-02 12:02 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-06-02 12:54 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-06-01 13:46 ` Avi Kivity
2011-06-01 16:25 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-06-01 16:29 ` Avi Kivity
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110602115604.GD7141@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).