Re: [RFC PATCH 00/17] virtual-bus

[Avi Kivity]

Gregory Haskins wrote:

 

> > It's more of a "schedule and forget" which I think brings you the
> > win.  The host disables notifications and schedules the actual tx work
> > (rx from the host's perspective).  So now the guest and host continue
> > producing and consuming packets in parallel.  So long as the guest is
> > faster (due to the host being throttled?), notifications continue to
> > be disabled.
> >     
> Yep, when the "producer::consumer" ratio is > 1, we mitigate signaling. 
> When its < 1, we signal roughly once per packet.
>
>   
> > If you changed your rx_isr() to process the packets immediately
> > instead of scheduling, I think throughput would drop dramatically.
> >     
> Right, that is the point. :) This is that "soft asic" thing I was
> talking about yesterday.
>   

But all that has nothing to do with where the code lives, in the kernel 
or userspace.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/