On Wednesday 26 November 2008, Gleb Natapov wrote:
The interfaces that are being considered are netlink socket (only datagram
semantics, linux specific), new socket family or character device with
different minor number for each channel. Which one better suits for
the purpose? Is there other
On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 11:27 -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:33:59AM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
Hi Vivek,
Ryo, do you still want to stick to two level scheduling? Given the
problem
of it breaking down underlying scheduler's assumptions, probably it
Hello,
I'd like to ask what would be the best user space interface for generic
guest-host communication channel. The channel will be used to pass
mouse events to/from a guest or by managements software to communicate
with agents running in a guests or for something similar.
The interfaces that
SR-IOV drivers of Intel 82576 NIC are available. There are two parts
of the drivers: Physical Function driver and Virtual Function driver.
The PF driver is based on the IGB driver and is used to control PF to
allocate hardware specific resources and interface with the SR-IOV core.
The VF driver is
Hi Vivek,
From: Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] [RFC] Another proportional weight IO controller
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:27:20 -0500
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:33:59AM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
Hi Vivek,
Ryo, do you still want to stick to two level scheduling?
This patch integrates the IGB driver with the SR-IOV core. It shows how
the SR-IOV API is used to support the capability. Obviously people does
not need to put much effort to integrate the PF driver with SR-IOV core.
All SR-IOV standard stuff are handled by SR-IOV core and PF driver only
concerns
This patch makes the IGB driver allocate hardware resource (rx/tx queues)
for Virtual Functions. All operations in this patch are hardware specific.
---
drivers/net/igb/Makefile|2 +-
drivers/net/igb/e1000_82575.c |1 +
drivers/net/igb/e1000_82575.h | 61
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 09:47:07PM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
Hi Vivek,
From: Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] [RFC] Another proportional weight IO controller
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:27:20 -0500
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:33:59AM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
Hi
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:03:03PM +0800, Yu Zhao wrote:
SR-IOV drivers of Intel 82576 NIC are available. There are two parts
of the drivers: Physical Function driver and Virtual Function driver.
The PF driver is based on the IGB driver and is used to control PF to
allocate hardware specific
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:21:56PM +0800, Yu Zhao wrote:
This patch integrates the IGB driver with the SR-IOV core. It shows how
the SR-IOV API is used to support the capability. Obviously people does
not need to put much effort to integrate the PF driver with SR-IOV core.
All SR-IOV standard
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:40:43PM +0800, Yu Zhao wrote:
The attachment is the VF driver for Intel 82576 NIC.
Please don't attach things as tarballs, we can't review or easily read
them at all.
Care to resend it?
thanks,
greg k-h
___
Virtualization
* Rusty Russell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
+ /* No real sector limit. */
+ blk_queue_max_sectors(vblk-disk-queue, -1U);
+
Is that actually legitimate? I think it'd still work out, but seems
odd, e.g. all the spots that do:
q-max_hw_sectors 9
will just toss the upper bits...
* Greg KH ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
+static int
+igb_virtual(struct pci_dev *pdev, int nr_virtfn)
+{
+ unsigned char my_mac_addr[6] = {0x00, 0xDE, 0xAD, 0xBE, 0xEF, 0xFF};
+ struct net_device *netdev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev);
+ struct igb_adapter *adapter =
On 11/26/2008 8:58:59 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:21:56PM +0800, Yu Zhao wrote:
This patch integrates the IGB driver with the SR-IOV core. It shows
how the SR-IOV API is used to support the capability. Obviously
people does not need to put much effort to integrate the PF
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 6:06 AM, Paolo Valente [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fabio and I are a little bit worried about the fact that the problem
of working in the time domain instead of the service domain is not
being properly dealt with. Probably we did not express ourselves very
clearly, so we
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
On 11/26/2008 8:58:59 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:21:56PM +0800, Yu Zhao wrote:
This patch integrates the IGB driver with the SR-IOV core. It shows
how the SR-IOV API is used to support the capability.
Yu Zhao wrote:
SR-IOV drivers of Intel 82576 NIC are available. There are two parts
of the drivers: Physical Function driver and Virtual Function driver.
The PF driver is based on the IGB driver and is used to control PF to
allocate hardware specific resources and interface with the SR-IOV
From: Nauman Rafique [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, Nov 26, 2008 11:41:46AM -0800
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 6:06 AM, Paolo Valente [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fabio and I are a little bit worried about the fact that the problem
of working in the time domain instead of the service domain is not
From: Mark McLoughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:58:11 +
We don't really have a max tx packet size limit, so allow configuring
the device with up to 64k tx MTU.
Signed-off-by: Mark McLoughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rusty, ACK?
If so, I'll toss this into net-next-2.6,
19 matches
Mail list logo
