From: "Yu, Zhang" <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"Keir (Xen.org)" <keir@xen.org>,
Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>,
George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@citrix.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com>,
"zhiyuan.lv@intel.com" <zhiyuan.lv@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Resize the MAX_NR_IO_RANGES for ioreq server
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2015 22:49:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <559BE6F6.4020403@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <559C01C2020000780008D8EC@mail.emea.novell.com>
On 7/7/2015 10:43 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 07.07.15 at 16:30, <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> I know that George and you have concerns about the differences
>> between MMIO and guest page tables, but I do not quite understand
>> why. :)
>
> But you read George's very nice description of the differences? I
> ask because if you did, I don't see why you re-raise the question
> above.
>
Well, yes. I guess you mean this statement:
"the former is one or two actual ranges of a significant size; the
latter are (apparently) thousands of ranges of one page each."?
But I do not understand why this is abusing the io range interface.
Does the number matters so much? :)
B.R.
Yu
> Jan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-07 14:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-06 6:25 [PATCH v2 0/2] Refactor ioreq server for better performance Yu Zhang
2015-07-06 6:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] Resize the MAX_NR_IO_RANGES for ioreq server Yu Zhang
2015-07-06 12:35 ` George Dunlap
2015-07-06 12:38 ` Paul Durrant
2015-07-06 12:49 ` George Dunlap
2015-07-06 13:09 ` Paul Durrant
2015-07-06 13:23 ` George Dunlap
2015-07-06 13:28 ` George Dunlap
2015-07-06 13:33 ` Paul Durrant
2015-07-06 14:06 ` George Dunlap
2015-07-07 8:16 ` Yu, Zhang
2015-07-07 9:23 ` Paul Durrant
2015-07-07 12:53 ` Jan Beulich
2015-07-07 13:11 ` Paul Durrant
2015-07-07 14:04 ` Jan Beulich
2015-07-07 14:30 ` Yu, Zhang
2015-07-07 14:43 ` Jan Beulich
2015-07-07 14:49 ` Yu, Zhang [this message]
2015-07-07 15:10 ` Jan Beulich
2015-07-07 16:02 ` Yu, Zhang
2015-07-07 15:12 ` Paul Durrant
2015-07-07 15:27 ` Jan Beulich
2015-07-07 15:29 ` Paul Durrant
2015-07-06 6:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] Add new data structure to track ranges Yu Zhang
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=559BE6F6.4020403@linux.intel.com \
--to=yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=George.Dunlap@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=Paul.Durrant@citrix.com \
--cc=keir@xen.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
--cc=zhiyuan.lv@intel.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).