On Wed, 2012-01-11 at 14:26 -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: > > I'd say that's a special case but I see what you're getting at here. > > So what about keeping the config space read-only and using control > queues for > everything else? Which is exactly what Rusty and I are proposing :-) I would go further and eliminate the idea of a seqlock and instead of a status queue with precise messages indicating what changed. I would couple that with the new queue format allowing immediate data in the descriptor to avoid having to use indirect buffers for these, which means no allocation, no buffer pool etc... which makes everything a lot easier to deal with as well. We could probably have a helper library for sending control messages which could handle waiting for a ring slot to be free (practically always the case on control queues), writing the message, sending it and waiting for a status queue confirmation message. Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
