From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60438) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ys7RQ-00076J-HK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 May 2015 06:29:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ys7RP-0004bB-Fe for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 May 2015 06:29:36 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 12:29:26 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf Message-ID: <20150512102926.GC3696@noname.str.redhat.com> References: <1431409679-16077-1-git-send-email-den@openvz.org> <1431409679-16077-2-git-send-email-den@openvz.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1431409679-16077-2-git-send-email-den@openvz.org> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] block: minimal bounce buffer alignment List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Denis V. Lunev" Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Stefan Hajnoczi , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org Am 12.05.2015 um 07:47 hat Denis V. Lunev geschrieben: > The patch introduces new concept: minimal memory alignment for bounce > buffers. Original so called "optimal" value is actually minimal required > value for aligment. It should be used for validation that the IOVec > is properly aligned and bounce buffer is not required. > > Though, from the performance point of view, it would be better if > bounce buffer or IOVec allocated by QEMU will be aligned stricter. > > The patch does not change any alignment value yet. > > Signed-off-by: Denis V. Lunev > CC: Paolo Bonzini > CC: Kevin Wolf > CC: Stefan Hajnoczi Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf