From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47353) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ud02q-0003wW-AS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 May 2013 11:24:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ud02l-0007rk-K2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 May 2013 11:24:40 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:15261) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ud02l-0007rg-Cl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 May 2013 11:24:35 -0400 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r4GFOYNY011711 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 16 May 2013 11:24:34 -0400 Message-ID: <5194FA31.4060308@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 09:24:33 -0600 From: Eric Blake MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1368702445-30733-1-git-send-email-akong@redhat.com> <1368702445-30733-2-git-send-email-akong@redhat.com> <20130516121745.GE31841@redhat.com> <5194F41E.3020501@redhat.com> <20130516150326.GB2485@redhat.com> <5194F764.6010809@redhat.com> <20130516151723.GA2726@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20130516151723.GA2726@redhat.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="----enig2PAQDFJGJPKHKWEVKCNUI" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] net: introduce MAC_TABLE_CHANGED event List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Amos Kong , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) ------enig2PAQDFJGJPKHKWEVKCNUI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 05/16/2013 09:17 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> The >> existing throttling approach ensures that if the event includes latest= >> guest information, then the host doesn't even have to do do a query, a= nd >> is guaranteed that reacting to the final event will always see the mos= t >> recent request. But most importantly, if the existing throttling work= s, >> why do we have to invent a one-off approach for this event instead of >> reusing existing code? >=20 > Because of the 1st issue above. A large delay because we > exceed an arbitrary throttling rate would be bad > for the guest. Contrast with delay in e.g. > device delete event. > The throttling mechanism is good for events that host cares > about, not for events that guest cares about. Alright, your argument has me convinced :) Looks like we DO want to react to the guest as fast as possible, for less missed traffic in the guest, but also without overwhelming the host with events. --=20 Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org ------enig2PAQDFJGJPKHKWEVKCNUI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJRlPoxAAoJEKeha0olJ0NqkFgH/3ROpClmcfyatMoiWmEk6wmi Fg7MFDMxcmaIMZ6CG+UPYo4OzaMT1OjkLvMRwN0lQp/IEhcIbIRUVnhY/k9cj378 dKChcOBGBmsyWsZB54R76d8ZFsWOtsrKrZsI3aDnlzfwbo5EGKJEAMR9bbUEtKI6 4WDr+iJy0jPE0UwueXW8M4N/ACGjpyznU05gUbw2SaagAKx4GnU29SUymrdlyhrx i3c5k9T8mVOl9xd4sYrtFLN4HJTQR0yZkZSkfdWPxWPovimpqXr1o+maDOWUl1Xm R7lK+NaaR9P+bZF/DPs1Hm6KcGv7VZkYHpx2bKdWXm4bpvq272qnzWqjWGARHR8= =Q2h6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------enig2PAQDFJGJPKHKWEVKCNUI--