From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60031)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1ZBK40-0006P7-AC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 05:48:49 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1ZBK3x-0005p8-4I
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 05:48:48 -0400
Received: from mail-wg0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::22d]:36306)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1ZBK3w-0005ok-Sg
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 05:48:45 -0400
Received: by wguu7 with SMTP id u7so104095694wgu.3
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sat, 04 Jul 2015 02:48:42 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
References: <1435102773-3498-1-git-send-email-Don.Slutz@Gmail.com>
	<1435102773-3498-9-git-send-email-Don.Slutz@Gmail.com>
	<20150701082204-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
	<5596893C.7020700@Gmail.com>
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <5596931B.90306@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 15:50:19 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5596893C.7020700@Gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v8 8/8] vmport: Add VMware all ring hack
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Don Slutz <don.slutz@gmail.com>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, Don Slutz <dslutz@verizon.com>, Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>, =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=c3=a4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>



On 03/07/2015 15:08, Don Slutz wrote:
>>>
>> Creating it at the pc level and propagating makes code
>> messy but I'd go along with it if it made sense from
>> user's point of view, but it does not seem to make sense:
>> to me this looks more like a CPU feature than a machine property.
>> Or the property of the vmport rpc device that you created.
> 
> Well this is not a clear area.  It does look more like a CPU feature.  I
> went with a machine feature because that is where "vmport" currently is.

I think it should be a vmport property.

It would be cleaner to implement it using the MemTxAttrs mechanism, but
for KVM I'm afraid it would be too slow (and the slowness would affect
all I/O accesses, not just vmport ones, unless really ugly hacks are done).

Paolo