Re: [PATCH 2/5] /dev/vring: simple userspace-kernel ringbuffer interface.

2008-04-19 Thread David Miller
From: Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 02:41:14 +1000 > If only there were some kind of, I don't know... summit... for kernel > people... I'm starting to disbelieve the myth that because we can discuss technical issues on mailing lists, we should talk primarily about pro

Re: [PATCH 5/5] tun: vringfd xmit support.

2008-04-19 Thread Andrew Morton
> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 00:41:43 +1000 Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Saturday 19 April 2008 05:06:34 Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 01:15:15 +1000 Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > What is the maximum numbet of pages which an unpriviliged user can > > >

Re: [PATCH 2/5] /dev/vring: simple userspace-kernel ringbuffer interface.

2008-04-19 Thread Rusty Russell
On Saturday 19 April 2008 05:38:50 Michael Kerrisk wrote: > On 4/18/08, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is may be our third high-bandwidth user/kernel interface to > > transport bulk data ("hbukittbd") which was implemented because its > > predecessors weren't quite right. In a y

Re: [PATCH 2/5] /dev/vring: simple userspace-kernel ringbuffer interface.

2008-04-19 Thread Rusty Russell
On Sunday 20 April 2008 02:33:22 Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 02:05:31AM +1000, Rusty Russell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > There are two reasons not to grab the lock. It turns out that if we > > tried to lock here, we'd deadlock, since the callbacks are called under > > the

Re: [PATCH 2/5] /dev/vring: simple userspace-kernel ringbuffer interface.

2008-04-19 Thread Rusty Russell
On Saturday 19 April 2008 20:22:15 Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > Hi. > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 02:39:48PM +1000, Rusty Russell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > +int vring_get_buffer(struct vring_info *vr, > > +struct iovec *in_iov, > > +unsigned int *num_in, unsigned lo

Re: [PATCH 2/5] /dev/vring: simple userspace-kernel ringbuffer interface.

2008-04-19 Thread Jonathan Corbet
> So I think it would be good to plonk the proposed interface on the table > and have a poke at it. Is it compat-safe? Is it extensible in a > backward-compatible fashion? Are there future-safe changes we should make > to it? Can Michael Kerrisk understand, review and document it? etc. > > Yo

Re: [PATCH 5/5] tun: vringfd xmit support.

2008-04-19 Thread Rusty Russell
On Saturday 19 April 2008 05:06:34 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 01:15:15 +1000 Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > What is the maximum numbet of pages which an unpriviliged user can > > > concurrently pin with this code? > > > > Since only root can open the tun device, it'