On 11/08/2017 19:23, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 04:09:26PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 10/08/2017 23:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Then we probably should fail probe if vq size is too small.
What does this mean?
>>>
>>> We must prevent driver from submittin
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 04:09:26PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/08/2017 23:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> Then we probably should fail probe if vq size is too small.
> >> What does this mean?
> >
> > We must prevent driver from submitting s/g lists > vq size to device.
>
> What is the
On 10/08/2017 23:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> Then we probably should fail probe if vq size is too small.
>> What does this mean?
>
> We must prevent driver from submitting s/g lists > vq size to device.
What is the rationale for the limit? It makes no sense if indirect
descriptors are avai
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:41:47AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:35:11PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:31:44AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > Then we probably should fail probe if vq size is too small.
> >
> > What does this
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:35:11PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:31:44AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Then we probably should fail probe if vq size is too small.
>
> What does this mean?
>
> Rich.
We must prevent driver from submitting s/g lists > vq size
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:31:44AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Then we probably should fail probe if vq size is too small.
What does this mean?
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:30:38PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:21:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 05:40:34PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > If using indirect descriptors, you can make the total_sg as large as
> > > you want
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:21:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 05:40:34PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > If using indirect descriptors, you can make the total_sg as large as
> > you want.
>
> That would be a spec violation though, even if it happens to
> work o
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 05:40:34PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> If using indirect descriptors, you can make the total_sg as large as
> you want.
That would be a spec violation though, even if it happens to
work on current QEMU.
The spec says:
A driver MUST NOT create a descriptor ch
On 10/08/2017 18:40, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> If using indirect descriptors, you can make the total_sg as large as
> you want. If not, BUG is too serious because the function later
> returns -ENOSPC.
>
> Thanks Paolo Bonzini, Christoph Hellwig.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard W.M. Jones
> ---
>
If using indirect descriptors, you can make the total_sg as large as
you want. If not, BUG is too serious because the function later
returns -ENOSPC.
Thanks Paolo Bonzini, Christoph Hellwig.
Signed-off-by: Richard W.M. Jones
---
drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 inserti
11 matches
Mail list logo