On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:59:34AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 09/13/2010 04:04 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 09:50:42AM +0530, Krishna Kumar2 wrote: > >>"Michael S. Tsirkin"<mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 09/12/2010 05:16:37 PM: > >> > >>>"Michael S. Tsirkin"<mst@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>09/12/2010 05:16 PM > >>> > >>>On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 07:19:33PM +0530, Krishna Kumar2 wrote: > >>>>Unfortunately I need a > >>>>constant in vhost for now. > >>>Maybe not even that: you create multiple vhost-net > >>>devices so vhost-net in kernel does not care about these > >>>either, right? So this can be just part of vhost_net.h > >>>in qemu. > >>Sorry, I didn't understand what you meant. > >> > >>I can remove all socks[] arrays/constants by pre-allocating > >>sockets in vhost_setup_vqs. Then I can remove all "socks" > >>parameters in vhost_net_stop, vhost_net_release and > >>vhost_net_reset_owner. > >> > >>Does this make sense? > >> > >>Thanks, > >> > >>- KK > >Here's what I mean: each vhost device includes 1 TX > >and 1 RX VQ. Instead of teaching vhost about multiqueue, > >we could simply open /dev/vhost-net multiple times. > >How many times would be up to qemu. > > Trouble is, each vhost-net device is associated with 1 tun/tap > device which means that each vhost-net device is associated with a > transmit and receive queue. > > I don't know if you'll always have an equal number of transmit and > receive queues but there's certainly challenge in terms of > flexibility with this model. > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori Not really, TX and RX can be mapped to different devices, or you can only map one of these. What is the trouble? What other features would you desire in terms of flexibility? -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
