On 6/14/23 1:25 AM, michael.chris...@oracle.com wrote:
> It would be nice if the vhost layer could use the io-wq code as sort of
> generic worker. I can look into what that would take if Jens is ok
> with that type of thing.
We could use the io-wq code, but we hit the same problems as before:
1.
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 01:02:58AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> At a quick glance it looks like io_uring already supports the
> functionality that vhost supports (which I think is networking and
> scsi).
There's vsock too.
--
MST
___
On 6/14/23 12:25?AM, michael.chris...@oracle.com wrote:
> On 6/14/23 1:02 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> I am sad my idea for simplifying things did not work out.
>>
>>
>> Let's try an even bigger idea to reduce maintenance and simplify things.
>>
>> Could vhost depend on io_uring?
>>
>> Could
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 01:02:58AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> I am sad my idea for simplifying things did not work out.
>
>
> Let's try an even bigger idea to reduce maintenance and simplify things.
>
> Could vhost depend on io_uring?
>
> Could vhost just be a translation layer of
On 6/14/23 1:02 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> I am sad my idea for simplifying things did not work out.
>
>
> Let's try an even bigger idea to reduce maintenance and simplify things.
>
> Could vhost depend on io_uring?
>
> Could vhost just be a translation layer of existing vhost requests
I am sad my idea for simplifying things did not work out.
Let's try an even bigger idea to reduce maintenance and simplify things.
Could vhost depend on io_uring?
Could vhost just be a translation layer of existing vhost requests to
io_uring requests?
At a quick glance it looks like
