Hi Dave, > On 3 Jul 2021, at 19:08, Matthias Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Dave, > > * Dave Voutila wrote: >> Looking for some broader testing of the following diff. It cleans up >> some complicated logic predominantly left over from the early days of >> vmd prior to its having a dedicated device thread. >> >> In summary, this diff: >> >> - Removes vionet "rx pending" state handling and removes the code path >> for the vcpu thread to possibly take control of the virtio net device >> and attempt a read of the underlying tap(4). (virtio.{c,h}, vm.c) >> >> - Removes ns8250 "rcv pending" state handling and removes the code path >> for the vcpu thread to read the pty via com_rcv(). (ns8250.{c,h}) >> >> In both of the above cases, the event handling thread will be notified >> of readable data and deal with it. >> >> Why remove them? The logic is overly complicated and hard to reason >> about for zero gain. (This diff results in no intended functional >> change.) Plus, some of the above logic I helped add to deal with the >> race conditions and state corruption over a year ago. The logic was >> needed once upon a time, but shouldn't be needed at present. >> >> I've had positive testing feedback from abieber@ so far with at least >> the ns8250/uart diff, but want to cast a broader net here with both >> before either part is committed. I debated splitting these up, but >> they're thematically related. > > I have the diff running since one week on -current with stable/current > and an Archlinux guest and have noticed no regression so far. > > Cheers > > Matthias
No issues on my side as well. Mischa
