On 04/11/2018 04:19 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:11:25AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
>> Let us unify the wording when talking about notifications. This change
>> establishes the terms available buffer notification for what was usually
>> simply called notification or
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:11:27 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
[Have not yet looked at your other patches, on my list.]
> The various notifications are introduced and specified in the common
> (i.e. transport agnostic) portion of this specification. How
> notifications are
On 04/11/2018 09:50 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:11:27 +0200
> Halil Pasic wrote:
>
> [Have not yet looked at your other patches, on my list.]
>
>> The various notifications are introduced and specified in the common
>> (i.e. transport agnostic)
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:58:37 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
> On 04/11/2018 04:19 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:11:25AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> >> \begin{lstlisting}
> >> -virtq_disable_interrupts(vq);
> >> +virtq_disable_notifications(vq);
On 11/04/2018 04:19, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:11:25AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
>> Let us unify the wording when talking about notifications. This change
>> establishes the terms available buffer notification for what was usually
>> simply called notification or
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 14:35:23 +0200
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/04/2018 04:19, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:11:25AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> >> Let us unify the wording when talking about notifications. This change
> >> establishes the terms
On 11/04/2018 14:55, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>> Nice, I think the cleanup is worthwhile.
>> I agree. I wondered if we should use the term "used buffer interrupt"
>> and "available buffer notification". In the common case I think it
>> would be clearer, though there are cases such as vhost-pci
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 15:42:34 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
> On 04/11/2018 09:50 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:11:27 +0200
> > Halil Pasic wrote:
> >> +\item Notifications (via hypercall and virtual interrupts).
> >
> >
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:03:32AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 08:24:43AM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
> >On 4/10/2018 11:03 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:59:02PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
> >> > On 4/10/2018 8:43 AM, Jiri Pirko
On 23/03/18 08:27, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>>> The host kernel needs to have *some* MSI region in place before the
>>> guest can start configuring interrupts, otherwise it won't know what
>>> address to give to the underlying hardware. However, as soon as the host
>>> kernel has picked a region, host
On 23/03/18 15:00, Robin Murphy wrote:
[...]
>> +/*
>> + * Treat unknown subtype as RESERVED, but urge users to update their
>> + * driver.
>> + */
>> +if (mem->subtype != VIRTIO_IOMMU_RESV_MEM_T_RESERVED &&
>> +mem->subtype != VIRTIO_IOMMU_RESV_MEM_T_MSI)
>> +
On 4/11/2018 8:51 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:59:48PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
This provides a generic interface for paravirtual drivers to listen
for netdev register/unregister/link change events from pci ethernet
devices with the same MAC and takeover their
On 04/10/2018 08:12 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
On 2018年04月10日 05:11, Jonathan Helman wrote:
On 03/22/2018 07:38 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
On 2018年03月22日 11:10, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 09:52:18AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
On 2018年03月20日 12:26, Jonathan Helman wrote:
On 4/10/2018 11:03 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:59:02PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/10/2018 8:43 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:27:48PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/10/2018 8:22 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at
14 matches
Mail list logo