On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 2:35 PM Dixit, Ashutosh
wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 04:53:09 -0700, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > - PCIe endpoint, with the endpoint controlling the virtio configuration
> > - PCIe endpoint, with the host (the side that has the pci_driver)
> > controlling
> > the virtio
On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 04:53:09 -0700, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:07 AM Vincent Whitchurch
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 04:50:36PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > I think we should try to do something on top of the PCIe endpoint
> > > subsystem
> > > to make
On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 03:07:27 -0700, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 04:50:36PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > I think we should try to do something on top of the PCIe endpoint subsystem
> > to make it work across arbitrary combinations of host and device
> > implementations,
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:07 AM Vincent Whitchurch
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 04:50:36PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > I think we should try to do something on top of the PCIe endpoint subsystem
> > to make it work across arbitrary combinations of host and device
> > implementations,
>
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:07:27AM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 04:50:36PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > I think we should try to do something on top of the PCIe endpoint subsystem
> > to make it work across arbitrary combinations of host and device
> >
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 04:50:36PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> I think we should try to do something on top of the PCIe endpoint subsystem
> to make it work across arbitrary combinations of host and device
> implementations,
> and provide a superset of what the MIC driver, (out-of-tree)
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 3:42 AM Sherry Sun wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign the
> > used ring
>
> Thanks for your detailed reply.
> Yes, the PCIe endpoint subsystem is the base code, actually we have
> implemented a set
> of pci endpoint code
Hi Arnd,
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign the used
> ring
>
> (resending from the kernel.org address after getting bounces again)
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 7:29 AM Sherry Sun wrote:
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign
Hi Vincent,
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign the used
> ring
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 08:05:43AM +0100, Sherry Sun wrote:
> > Can you help test the patch about removing the codes of reassign used
> > ring, and comment on the impact for Intel MIC platform?
Hi Sudeep,
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign the used
> ring
>
> On Wed, 2020-10-28 at 01:47 +, Sherry Sun wrote:
> > Hi Vincent,
> >
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign
> > > the used ring
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 27,
(resending from the kernel.org address after getting bounces again)
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 7:29 AM Sherry Sun wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign the used
> >
> > Both Ashutosh and I have moved on to other projects. The MIC devices have
> > been
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 02:47:49AM +0100, Sherry Sun wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign the used
> > ring
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 08:05:43AM +0100, Sherry Sun wrote:
> > > Can you help test the patch about removing the codes of reassign used
> >
On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 08:05:43AM +0100, Sherry Sun wrote:
> Can you help test the patch about removing the codes of reassign used
> ring, and comment on the impact for Intel MIC platform? Thanks for
> any help.
I don't have access to MIC hardware myself, either.
But this patch is quite
Hi Sudeep & Ashutosh & Vincent,
Can you help test the patch about removing the codes of reassign used ring, and
comment on the impact for Intel MIC platform?
Thanks for any help.
Best regards
Sherry
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign the used
> ring
>
> On
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 03:04:45AM +, Sherry Sun wrote:
> Hi Greg & Christoph,
>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign the used
> > ring
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:06:36PM +0800, Sherry Sun wrote:
> > > We don't need to allocate and reassign the used
Hi Greg & Christoph,
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] misc: vop: do not allocate and reassign the used
> ring
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:06:36PM +0800, Sherry Sun wrote:
> > We don't need to allocate and reassign the used ring here and remove
> > the used_address_updated flag.Since RC has
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:06:36PM +0800, Sherry Sun wrote:
> We don't need to allocate and reassign the used ring here and remove the
> used_address_updated flag.Since RC has allocated the entire vring,
> including the used ring. Simply add the corresponding offset can get the
> used ring
Hi Sherry,
Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
[auto build test WARNING on char-misc/char-misc-testing]
[also build test WARNING on soc/for-next linus/master v5.9 next-20201022]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch,
We don't need to allocate and reassign the used ring here and remove the
used_address_updated flag.Since RC has allocated the entire vring,
including the used ring. Simply add the corresponding offset can get the
used ring address.
If following the orginal way to reassign the used ring, will
19 matches
Mail list logo
