From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:57456) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaOkR-00009o-3d for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 05:38:42 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaOkN-0001Hv-To for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 05:38:38 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:25568) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaOkN-0001Hi-Lx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 05:38:35 -0500 Message-ID: <50AA0C26.3060506@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:38:30 +0100 From: Kevin Wolf MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1352992746-8767-1-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com> <1352992746-8767-8-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com> <87d2zey3p8.fsf@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 7/7] virtio-blk: add x-data-plane=on|off performance feature List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: Anthony Liguori , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel , Khoa Huynh , Stefan Hajnoczi , Paolo Bonzini , Asias He Am 16.11.2012 07:22, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Stefan Hajnoczi writes: >> >>> The virtio-blk-data-plane feature is easy to integrate into >>> hw/virtio-blk.c. The data plane can be started and stopped similar to >>> vhost-net. >>> >>> Users can take advantage of the virtio-blk-data-plane feature using the >>> new -device virtio-blk-pci,x-data-plane=on property. >> >> I don't think this should be a property of virtio-blk-pci but rather a >> separate device. > > The hw/virtio-blk.c code still needs to be used since > hw/dataplane/virtio-blk.c is only a subset of virtio-blk. > > So we're talking about adding a new virtio-blk-data-plane-pci device > type to hw/virtio-pci.c? A new device sounds wrong to me, it's the very same thing from a guest perspective. Which makes me wonder if in the final version it shouldn't be a -blockdev option rather than a -device one... Kevin