On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 03:09:54PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 01:12:33PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 05:55:38PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 07:26:58PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > > > Both
On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 01:12:33PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 05:55:38PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 07:26:58PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Both virtqueue_packed_get_avail_bytes() and
> virtqueue_split_get_avail_bytes() access
On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 05:55:38PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 07:26:58PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > Both virtqueue_packed_get_avail_bytes() and
> > virtqueue_split_get_avail_bytes() access the region cache, but
> > their caller also does. Simplify by
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 07:26:58PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
Both virtqueue_packed_get_avail_bytes() and
virtqueue_split_get_avail_bytes() access the region cache, but
their caller also does. Simplify by having virtqueue_get_avail_bytes
calling both with RCU lock held, and passing the
Both virtqueue_packed_get_avail_bytes() and
virtqueue_split_get_avail_bytes() access the region cache, but
their caller also does. Simplify by having virtqueue_get_avail_bytes
calling both with RCU lock held, and passing the caches as argument.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
RFC
