Il 07/02/2013 14:09, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto: >> One major difference between virtqueue_add_buf and virtqueue_add_sg >> is that the latter uses scatterlist iterators, which follow chained >> scatterlist structs and stop at ending markers. In order to avoid code >> duplication, and use the new API from virtqueue_add_buf (patch 8), we need >> to change all existing callers of virtqueue_add_buf to provide well-formed >> scatterlists. This is what patches 2-7 do. For virtio-blk it is easiest >> to just switch to the new API, just like for virtio-scsi. For virtio-net >> the ending marker must be reset after calling virtqueue_add_buf, in >> preparation for the next usage of the scatterlist. Other drivers are >> safe already. > > What are the changes as compared to the previous version? > How about some comments made on the previous version? > See e.g. > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1891541/ Two changes: 1) added virtqueue_add_sg_single; 2) reimplemented virtqueue_add_buf in terms of the new API, which requires virtio-blk and virtio-net changes. The virtio-blk and virtio-net changes are based on some ideas in the patch Rusty posted, but virtio-net is a bit simpler and virtio-blk was redone from scratch. > Generally we have code for direct and indirect which is already > painful. We do not want 4 more variants of this code. Yes, indeed, the other main difference is that I'm now reimplementing virtqueue_add_buf using the new functions. So: - we previously had 2 variants (direct/indirect) - v1 had 4 variants (direct/indirect x add_buf/add_sg) - v2 has 4 variants (direct/indirect x add_sg/add_sg_single) >> This is an RFC for two reasons. First, because I haven't done enough >> testing yet (especially with all the variations on receiving that >> virtio-net has). Second, because I still have two struct vring_desc * >> fields in virtqueue API, which is a layering violation. I'm not really >> sure how important that is and how to fix that---except by making the >> fields void*. > > Hide the whole structure as part of vring struct, the problem will go > away. Yes, that's the other possibility. Will do for the next submission. Paolo >> Paolo >> Paolo Bonzini (8): >> virtio: add functions for piecewise addition of buffers >> virtio-blk: reorganize virtblk_add_req >> virtio-blk: use virtqueue_start_buf on bio path >> virtio-blk: use virtqueue_start_buf on req path >> scatterlist: introduce sg_unmark_end >> virtio-net: unmark scatterlist ending after virtqueue_add_buf >> virtio-scsi: use virtqueue_start_buf >> virtio: reimplement virtqueue_add_buf using new functions >> >> block/blk-integrity.c | 2 +- >> block/blk-merge.c | 2 +- >> drivers/block/virtio_blk.c | 165 +++++++++-------- >> drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 21 ++- >> drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c | 103 +++++------ >> drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 417 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- >> include/linux/scatterlist.h | 16 ++ >> include/linux/virtio.h | 25 +++ >> 8 files changed, 460 insertions(+), 291 deletions(-) -- 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
