On Mon, 2019-09-16 at 11:30 -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> So first we really need to fix up Starting and stopping section,
> explaining that if the FD is invalid, this means ring
> is immediately started, right?
It actually does say that, and ... I even changed it already to say the
ring
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 01:40:35PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> I had just wanted to prepare a resend, but
>
> > > Hmm I don't like this. I propose that with
> > > VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_IN_BAND_NOTIFICATIONS
> > > we just don't allow VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_CALL (if you think it's
Hi Michael,
I had just wanted to prepare a resend, but
> > Hmm I don't like this. I propose that with
> > VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_IN_BAND_NOTIFICATIONS
> > we just don't allow VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_CALL (if you think it's
> > important to allow them, we can say that we do not require them).
>
>
On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 09:09 +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>
> You're actually using the same trick of using
> REPLY_ACK/need_reply to make it synchronous that set_mem_table does;
I don't think it's really the same - though arguably I could have
spec'ed the inband signal to *require* an
* Johannes Berg (johan...@sipsolutions.net) wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-09-11 at 20:15 +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>
> > > Extend the protocol slightly, so that a message can be used for kick
> > > and call instead, if VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_IN_BAND_NOTIFICATIONS is
> > > negotiated. This in
On Wed, 2019-09-11 at 20:15 +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > Extend the protocol slightly, so that a message can be used for kick
> > and call instead, if VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_IN_BAND_NOTIFICATIONS is
> > negotiated. This in itself doesn't guarantee synchronisation, but both
> > sides
* Johannes Berg (johan...@sipsolutions.net) wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg
>
> For good reason, vhost-user is currently built asynchronously, that
> way better performance can be obtained. However, for certain use
> cases such as simulation, this is problematic.
>
> Consider an event-based
On Wed, 2019-09-11 at 10:07 -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> > + #define VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_INFLIGHT_SHMFD12
> > + #define VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_IN_BAND_NOTIFICATIONS 13
>
> INFLIGHT so INBAND?
*shrug*, sure
> > + instead of waiting for the call; however, if the protocol
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 03:45:38PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg
>
> For good reason, vhost-user is currently built asynchronously, that
> way better performance can be obtained. However, for certain use
> cases such as simulation, this is problematic.
>
> Consider an
