Anthony Liguori wrote: > We're pretty sloppy in virtio right now about phys_ram_base assumptions. This > patch is an incremental step between what we have today and a full blown DMA > API. I backported the DMA API but the performance impact was not acceptable > to me. There's only a slight performance impact with this particular patch. > > Since we're no longer assuming guest physical memory is contiguous, we need > a more complex way to validate the memory regions than just checking if it's > within ram_size. >
Applied patches 1-2. Since patch 4 is under contention on qemu-devel, and 3 and 5 depend on it, I'd like to get the can_receive semantic change accepted first. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
