On 04/27/2010 01:36 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
A few comments:
1) The problem was not block watermark itself but generating a
notification on the watermark threshold. It's a heuristic and should
be implemented based on polling block stats.
Polling for an event that never happens is bad
On 04/27/2010 11:14 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 01:36 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
A few comments:
1) The problem was not block watermark itself but generating a
notification on the watermark threshold. It's a heuristic and should
be implemented based on polling block stats.
Polling
Am 27.04.2010 00:36, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 04/26/2010 05:12 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
* Anthony Liguori (anth...@codemonkey.ws) wrote:
On 04/26/2010 12:26 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
While I don't expect it to be the
On 04/27/2010 11:48 AM, Dor Laor wrote:
Here's another option: an nbd-like protocol that remotes all BlockDriver
operations except read and write over a unix domain socket. The open
operation returns an fd (SCM_RIGHTS strikes again) that is used for read
and write. This can be used to implement
On 04/27/2010 11:56 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 11:48 AM, Dor Laor wrote:
Here's another option: an nbd-like protocol that remotes all BlockDriver
operations except read and write over a unix domain socket. The open
operation returns an fd (SCM_RIGHTS strikes again) that is used for
Am 27.04.2010 10:56, schrieb Avi Kivity:
On 04/27/2010 11:48 AM, Dor Laor wrote:
Here's another option: an nbd-like protocol that remotes all BlockDriver
operations except read and write over a unix domain socket. The open
operation returns an fd (SCM_RIGHTS strikes again) that is used for
On 04/27/2010 12:08 PM, Dor Laor wrote:
On 04/27/2010 11:56 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 11:48 AM, Dor Laor wrote:
Here's another option: an nbd-like protocol that remotes all
BlockDriver
operations except read and write over a unix domain socket. The open
operation returns an fd
On 04/27/2010 12:16 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 27.04.2010 10:56, schrieb Avi Kivity:
On 04/27/2010 11:48 AM, Dor Laor wrote:
Here's another option: an nbd-like protocol that remotes all BlockDriver
operations except read and write over a unix domain socket. The open
operation returns
On 04/27/2010 12:22 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 12:08 PM, Dor Laor wrote:
On 04/27/2010 11:56 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 11:48 AM, Dor Laor wrote:
Here's another option: an nbd-like protocol that remotes all
BlockDriver
operations except read and write over a unix domain
Am 27.04.2010 11:32, schrieb Dor Laor:
On 04/27/2010 12:22 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 12:08 PM, Dor Laor wrote:
On 04/27/2010 11:56 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 11:48 AM, Dor Laor wrote:
IMHO the whole thing is way over engineered:
a) Having another channel into qemu is
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 05:36:52PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/26/2010 05:12 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
* Anthony Liguori (anth...@codemonkey.ws) wrote:
On 04/26/2010 12:26 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
While I don't expect it
On 04/27/2010 06:11 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
Network cards have low number of rx/tx buffers interrupt. This is also
heuristic. Do you think driver should poll for this event instead and
NIC designers just wasted their time designing the feature?
I don't see how the two cases are at all
On 04/27/2010 03:14 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 01:36 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
A few comments:
1) The problem was not block watermark itself but generating a
notification on the watermark threshold. It's a heuristic and should
be implemented based on polling block stats.
On 04/27/2010 04:03 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/27/2010 03:14 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 01:36 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
A few comments:
1) The problem was not block watermark itself but generating a
notification on the watermark threshold. It's a heuristic and
should be
On 04/27/2010 03:53 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 27.04.2010 00:36, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 04/26/2010 05:12 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
* Anthony Liguori (anth...@codemonkey.ws) wrote:
On 04/26/2010 12:26 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:03:42AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/27/2010 03:14 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 01:36 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
A few comments:
1) The problem was not block watermark itself but generating a
notification on the watermark threshold. It's a
On 04/27/2010 04:41 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 27.04.2010 11:32, schrieb Dor Laor:
On 04/27/2010 12:22 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 12:08 PM, Dor Laor wrote:
On 04/27/2010 11:56 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 11:48 AM, Dor Laor wrote:
IMHO
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 02:11:46PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:03:42AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/27/2010 03:14 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 01:36 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
A few comments:
1) The problem was not block watermark itself
Am 27.04.2010 15:10, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 04/27/2010 03:53 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 27.04.2010 00:36, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 04/26/2010 05:12 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
* Anthony Liguori (anth...@codemonkey.ws) wrote:
On 04/26/2010 12:26 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
On 04/27/2010 08:05 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:00:02AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/27/2010 06:11 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
Network cards have low number of rx/tx buffers interrupt. This is also
heuristic. Do you think driver should poll for this event
On 04/27/2010 08:18 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
The watermark is not some complex computed value, but actually the
statistic itself. We can get rid of handling a threshold in qemu by just
signalling something has changed with this stat.
I'm really not arguing that qemu should do anything complex or
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:19:06AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/27/2010 08:05 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:00:02AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/27/2010 06:11 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
Network cards have low number of rx/tx buffers interrupt. This is also
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 04:15:54PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 02:11:46PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:03:42AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/27/2010 03:14 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/27/2010 01:36 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Am 27.04.2010 15:21, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 04/27/2010 08:18 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
The watermark is not some complex computed value, but actually the
statistic itself. We can get rid of handling a threshold in qemu by just
signalling something has changed with this stat.
I'm really not
On 04/27/2010 08:42 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 27.04.2010 15:21, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 04/27/2010 08:18 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
The watermark is not some complex computed value, but actually the
statistic itself. We can get rid of handling a threshold in qemu by just
signalling
Am 27.04.2010 15:48, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 04/27/2010 08:42 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 27.04.2010 15:21, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 04/27/2010 08:18 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
The watermark is not some complex computed value, but actually the
statistic itself. We can get rid of
On 04/27/2010 08:58 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 27.04.2010 15:48, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 04/27/2010 08:42 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 27.04.2010 15:21, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 04/27/2010 08:18 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
The watermark is not some complex computed
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 02:38:17PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 04:15:54PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 02:11:46PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:03:42AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/27/2010 03:14 AM,
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
While I don't expect it to be the case this week, if we have a
lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call.
thanks,
-chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in
the body of a message to
On 04/26/2010 12:26 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
While I don't expect it to be the case this week, if we have a
lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call.
- qemu management interface (and libvirt)
- stable tree policy (push
* Anthony Liguori (anth...@codemonkey.ws) wrote:
On 04/26/2010 12:26 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
While I don't expect it to be the case this week, if we have a
lack of agenda items I'll cancel the week's call.
- qemu management
On 04/26/2010 05:12 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
* Anthony Liguori (anth...@codemonkey.ws) wrote:
On 04/26/2010 12:26 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
While I don't expect it to be the case this week, if we have a
lack of agenda
On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 12:51:08 -0500
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 04/26/2010 12:26 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
While I don't expect it to be the case this week, if we have a
lack of agenda items I'll cancel the
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:15:58PM -0300, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 12:51:08 -0500
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 04/26/2010 12:26 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
While I don't expect it to be
34 matches
Mail list logo
