Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-03-05 Thread Rusty Russell
"Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: >> Without the inline keywords, it doesn't inline virtqueue_add, and thus >> sg_next_chained and sg_next_add aren't inlined: >> >> $ for i in `seq 50`; do /usr/bin/time --format=%U ./vringh_test --indirect >> --eventidx --parallel; done 2>&1 | stats --trim-outliers

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-03-05 Thread Rusty Russell
Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com writes: Without the inline keywords, it doesn't inline virtqueue_add, and thus sg_next_chained and sg_next_add aren't inlined: $ for i in `seq 50`; do /usr/bin/time --format=%U ./vringh_test --indirect --eventidx --parallel; done 21 | stats --trim-outliers

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-27 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 03:38:44PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:32:46AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > >> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > >> >> These are specialized

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-27 Thread Rusty Russell
"Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:32:46AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: >> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: >> >> These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover >> >> over 50% of cases and

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-27 Thread Rusty Russell
Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com writes: On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:32:46AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com writes: On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover over 50% of

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-27 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 03:38:44PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com writes: On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:32:46AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com writes: On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: These are

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-25 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:32:46AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > >> These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover > >> over 50% of cases and are far clearer. > >> > >> In

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-25 Thread Rusty Russell
"Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: >> These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover >> over 50% of cases and are far clearer. >> >> In particular, the scatterlists passed to these functions don't have >> to be clean

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-25 Thread Rusty Russell
Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com writes: On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover over 50% of cases and are far clearer. In particular, the scatterlists passed to these functions don't have to be

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-25 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:32:46AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com writes: On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover over 50% of cases and are far clearer. In

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-21 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover > over 50% of cases and are far clearer. > > In particular, the scatterlists passed to these functions don't have > to be clean (ie. we ignore end markers). > >

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-21 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover over 50% of cases and are far clearer. In particular, the scatterlists passed to these functions don't have to be clean (ie. we ignore end markers). FIXME: I'm

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-20 Thread Wanlong Gao
On 02/19/2013 03:56 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: > These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover > over 50% of cases and are far clearer. > > In particular, the scatterlists passed to these functions don't have > to be clean (ie. we ignore end markers). > > FIXME: I'm not sure

Re: [PATCH 08/16] virtio_ring: virtqueue_add_outbuf / virtqueue_add_inbuf.

2013-02-20 Thread Wanlong Gao
On 02/19/2013 03:56 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: These are specialized versions of virtqueue_add_buf(), which cover over 50% of cases and are far clearer. In particular, the scatterlists passed to these functions don't have to be clean (ie. we ignore end markers). FIXME: I'm not sure about