On (Fri) Feb 12 2010 [19:34:58], Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 03:32:13 pm Amit Shah wrote:
> > Hey Rusty,
> >
> > Here are a few fixes for virtio and virtio_console.
> >
> > The first patch ensures the data elements of vqs are properly
> > initialised at allocation-time so that we don't trigger BUG_ONs. I found
> > this when hot-unplugging ports and there was just one unused buffer.
> > detach_unused_buffers() kept returning pointers that were invalid. I
> > didn't catch this earlier as I had the in_vq filled completely.
> >
> > Patches 2, 4 and 5 can be folded into the series as they are bugfixes
> > for the functionality present there.
> >
> > About patch 5: When running a test that transfers a 260M file from the
> > host to the guest, qemu-kvm.git takes 17m with a single outstanding
> > buffer in the in_vq vs. 1m when the entire in_vq is filled. This is a
> > bug in qemu-kvm.git's scheduling, but since it's a big difference and
> > not much change involved, we could merge this now.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > If these patches are favourable, I could send you a tarball in private
> > so that the bugfixes are folded in the series and just patches 1, 3 and
> > 6 are added.
>
> I prefer to fold them myself, after they've spent some time in linux-next.
Fine by me.
BTW should patch 1 be considered for stable?
Thanks!
Amit
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
