Il 13/03/2013 04:13, Asias He ha scritto: >> > This takes dev mutex on data path which will introduce >> > contention esp for multiqueue. > Yes, for now it is okay, but for concurrent execution of multiqueue it is > really bad. > > By the way, what is the overhead of taking and releasing the > vs->dev.mutex even if no one contents for it? Is this overhead gnorable. There is a possibility of cacheline ping-pong, but apart from that it's ignorable. >> > How about storing the endpoint as part of vq >> > private data and protecting with vq mutex? > > Hmm, this makes sense, let's see how well it works. Then VHOST_SCSI_SET_ENDPOINT would have to go through all vqs, no? A rwlock seems simpler. Paolo -- 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
