On 2019/9/18 0:00, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) wrote:
> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert"
>
> The virtio-fs virtio device provides shared file system access using
> the FUSE protocol carried over virtio.
> The actual file server is implemented in an external vhost-user-fs device
> backend
On 2019/9/18 0:00, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) wrote:
> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert"
>
> Add the PCI version of vhost-user-fs.
>
> Launch QEMU like this:
>
> qemu -chardev socket,path=/tmp/vhost-fs.sock,id=chr0
>-device x-vhost-user-fs-pci,tag=myfs,chardev=chr0
>
>
On 2019/8/24 1:56, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) wrote:
> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert"
>
> The virtio-fs virtio device provides shared file system access using
> the FUSE protocol carried ovew virtio.
typo? ovew->over
> The actual file server is implemented in an external vhost-user-fs
On 2019/8/23 17:24, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> Do not use warn(3) and warnx(3) since they print to stderr. When
> --syslog is used these messages must go to syslog(3) instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi
> ---
> contrib/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 36 +++---
>
ainers patches for virtio-fs v0.3 are under development and will be
> submitted to Kata soon.
>
> Thanks to the following people for contributing code and to many more
> for helping the virtio-fs effort:
>
> Dr. David Alan Gilbert
> Eric Ren
> Eryu Guan
> Gan
On 2019/8/12 18:05, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 10:26:18AM +0800, piaojun wrote:
>> On 2019/8/9 16:21, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 10:53:16AM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>>>> * Stefan Hajnoczi (stefa...@redhat.co
On 2019/8/9 16:21, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 10:53:16AM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>> * Stefan Hajnoczi (stefa...@redhat.com) wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 04:57:15PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>> 2. Can MAP/UNMAP be performed directly in QEMU via a
Hi Stefan,
>From my test, your patch set of multithreading improves iops greatly as
below:
Guest configuration:
8 vCPU
8GB RAM
Linux 5.1 (vivek-aug-06-2019)
Host configuration:
Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2670 0 @ 2.60GHz (8 cores x 4 threads)
32GB RAM
Linux 3.10.0
EXT4 + LVM + local HDD
---
Hi Stefan,
On 2019/8/5 16:01, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 10:52:21AM +0800, piaojun wrote:
>> # fio -direct=1 -time_based -iodepth=1 -rw=randwrite -ioengine=libaio -bs=1M
>> -size=1G -numjob=1 -runtime=30 -group_reporting -name=file
>> -filen
Hi Stefan,
>From my test, 9p has better bandwidth than virtio as below:
---
9p Test:
# mount -t 9p -o
trans=virtio,version=9p2000.L,rw,nodev,msize=10,access=client 9pshare
/mnt/9pshare
# fio -direct=1 -time_based -iodepth=1 -rw=randwrite -ioengine=libaio -bs=1M
-size=1G -numjob=1
Hi Daniel and Dave,
On 2019/8/2 19:10, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 11:53:52AM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>> * piaojun (piao...@huawei.com) wrote:
>>> Use F_GETLK for fcntl when F_OFD_GETLK not defined, such as kernel 3.10.
>>>
Use F_GETLK for fcntl when F_OFD_GETLK not defined, such as kernel 3.10.
Signed-off-by: Jun Piao
---
v2:
- Use F_OFD_SETLK to replace F_OFD_GETLK in #ifdef.
---
contrib/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/contrib/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c
Hi Dave and Eric,
On 2019/8/1 22:26, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Dr. David Alan Gilbert (dgilb...@redhat.com) wrote:
>> * Eric Blake (ebl...@redhat.com) wrote:
>>> On 7/29/19 7:27 PM, piaojun wrote:
>>>> Use F_GETLK for fcntl when F_OFD_GETLK not defined
Hi Eric,
On 2019/7/30 21:28, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 7/29/19 7:27 PM, piaojun wrote:
>> Use F_GETLK for fcntl when F_OFD_GETLK not defined.
>
> Which system are you hitting this problem on?
>
> The problem with F_GETLK is that it is NOT as safe as F_OFD_GETLK.
>
> We
Hi Liam,
On 2019/7/30 20:22, Liam Merwick wrote:
> On 30/07/2019 01:27, piaojun wrote:
>> Use F_GETLK for fcntl when F_OFD_GETLK not defined.
>
>
> Use F_GETLK/F_SETLK for fcntl when F_OFD_GETLK/F_OFD_SETLK not defined.
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jun Pi
On 2019/7/29 23:41, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 08:35:36PM +0800, piaojun wrote:
>> Hi Stefan,
>>
>> On 2019/7/26 17:11, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>> Most lo_do_lookup() have already checked that the parent inode exists.
>>> lo_looku
Use F_GETLK for fcntl when F_OFD_GETLK not defined.
Signed-off-by: Jun Piao
---
contrib/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 9 +
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/contrib/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c
b/contrib/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c
index 9ae1381..757785b 100644
---
Hi Stefan,
On 2019/7/26 17:11, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> Most lo_do_lookup() have already checked that the parent inode exists.
> lo_lookup() hasn't and can therefore hit a NULL pointer dereference when
> lo_inode(req, parent) returns NULL.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi
> ---
>
Hi Stefan,
On 2019/7/26 17:11, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> Most lo_do_lookup() have already checked that the parent inode exists.
> lo_lookup() hasn't and can therefore hit a NULL pointer dereference when
> lo_inode(req, parent) returns NULL.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi
> ---
>
19 matches
Mail list logo
