On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 08:40:33AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/19/2009 03:38 AM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:26:23AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/18/2009 11:59 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
On a non shared-memory system (where the guest's RAM is not just a chunk
On 08/19/2009 06:28 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
Well, if you can't do that, you can't use virtio-pci on the host.
You'll need another virtio transport (equivalent to fake pci you
mentioned above).
Ok.
Is there something similar that I can study as an example? Should I look
at virtio-pci?
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 06:37:06PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/19/2009 06:28 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
Well, if you can't do that, you can't use virtio-pci on the host.
You'll need another virtio transport (equivalent to fake pci you
mentioned above).
Ok.
Is there something
On 08/19/2009 07:29 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
virtio-$yourhardware or maybe virtio-dma
How about virtio-phys?
Could work.
Arnd and BenH are both looking at PPC systems (similar to mine). Grant
Likely is looking at talking to an processor core running on an FPGA,
IIRC. Most
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:46:06AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 04:17:09PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:14:56AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
Case in point: Take an upstream kernel and you can modprobe the
On 08/18/2009 06:53 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
So, in my system, copy_(to|from)_user() is completely wrong. There is no
userspace, only a physical system. In fact, because normal x86 computers
do not have DMA controllers, the host system doesn't actually handle any
data transfer!
In fact,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 07:51:21PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/18/2009 06:53 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
So, in my system, copy_(to|from)_user() is completely wrong. There is no
userspace, only a physical system. In fact, because normal x86 computers
do not have DMA controllers, the host
On 08/18/2009 08:27 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
In fact, modern x86s do have dma engines these days (google for Intel
I/OAT), and one of our plans for vhost-net is to allow their use for
packets above a certain size. So a patch allowing vhost-net to
optionally use a dma engine is a good thing.
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 08:47:04PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/18/2009 08:27 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
In fact, modern x86s do have dma engines these days (google for Intel
I/OAT), and one of our plans for vhost-net is to allow their use for
packets above a certain size. So a patch allowing
On 08/18/2009 09:27 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
I think in this case you want one side to be virtio-net (I'm guessing
the x86) and the other side vhost-net (the ppc boards with the dma
engine). virtio-net on x86 would communicate with userspace on the ppc
board to negotiate features and get a mac
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:27:35AM -0700, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
I haven't studied vhost-net very carefully yet. As soon as I saw the
copy_(to|from)_user() I stopped reading, because it seemed useless for
my case. I'll look again and try to find where vhost-net supports
setting MAC addresses and
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:27:52AM -0700, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 07:51:21PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/18/2009 06:53 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
So, in my system, copy_(to|from)_user() is completely wrong. There is no
userspace, only a physical system. In fact,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:52:48PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/18/2009 09:27 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
I think in this case you want one side to be virtio-net (I'm guessing
the x86) and the other side vhost-net (the ppc boards with the dma
engine). virtio-net on x86 would communicate with
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 08:53:29AM -0700, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
I think Greg is referring to something like my virtio-over-PCI patch.
I'm pretty sure that vhost is completely useless for my situation. I'd
like to see vhost work for my use, so I'll try to explain what I'm
doing.
I've got a
On Tuesday 18 August 2009 20:35:22 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:27:52AM -0700, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
Also, in my case I'd like to boot Linux with my rootfs over NFS. Is
vhost-net capable of this?
I've had Arnd, BenH, and Grant Likely (and others, privately) contact
On 08/18/2009 11:59 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
On a non shared-memory system (where the guest's RAM is not just a chunk
of userspace RAM in the host system), virtio's management model seems to
fall apart. Feature negotiation doesn't work as one would expect.
In your case, virtio-net on the
On 08/19/2009 12:26 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
Off the top of my head, I would think that transporting userspace
addresses in the ring (for copy_(to|from)_user()) vs. physical addresses
(for DMAEngine) might be a problem. Pinning userspace pages into memory
for DMA is a bit of a pain, though it is
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:57:48PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 08:53:29AM -0700, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
I think Greg is referring to something like my virtio-over-PCI patch.
I'm pretty sure that vhost is completely useless for my situation. I'd
like to see vhost
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:26:23AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/18/2009 11:59 PM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
On a non shared-memory system (where the guest's RAM is not just a chunk
of userspace RAM in the host system), virtio's management model seems to
fall apart. Feature negotiation doesn't
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 01:06:45AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/19/2009 12:26 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
Off the top of my head, I would think that transporting userspace
addresses in the ring (for copy_(to|from)_user()) vs. physical addresses
(for DMAEngine) might be a problem. Pinning
On 08/19/2009 03:44 AM, Ira W. Snyder wrote:
You don't need in fact a third mode. You can mmap the x86 address space
into your ppc userspace and use the second mode. All you need then is
the dma engine glue and byte swapping.
Hmm, I'll have to think about that.
The ppc is a 32-bit
21 matches
Mail list logo
