Re: [PATCH net] virtio-net: reject small vring sizes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> > So, what do you think, we should fix virtio-net to work with smaller rings? we should fail probe?
> >
> > I think that since this never came up until now, there is no big demand to such small rings.
> 
> The worry is that once we start failing probe there's just a tiny chance
> hosts begin to rely on us failing probe then we won't be able to fix it.
> So it depends on the size of the patch I think. So far it seems small enough
> that wasting code on failing probe isn't worth it.
> 

I see your point.
Regardless, we'll need to fail probe in some cases.
ring size of 1 for example (if I'm not mistaken)
control vq even needs a bigger ring.

Maybe we can fix virtnet to allow smaller rings + fail probe in some cases, all in the same patch/patchset.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization



[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux