Linux Virtualization - May 2019 - [PATCH 01/10] virtio/s390: use vring_create_virtqueue

On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 04:07:44PM +0200, Cornelia Huck
wrote:
> On Tue, 7 May 2019 15:58:12 +0200
> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger at de.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 05.05.19 13:15, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > > On Sat, 4 May 2019 16:03:40 +0200
> > > Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >   
> > >> On Fri, 3 May 2019 16:04:48 -0400
> > >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com>
wrote:
> > >>  
> > >>> On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 11:17:24AM +0200, Cornelia Huck
wrote:
> > >>>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 20:32:36 +0200
> > >>>> Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >>>>     
> > >>>>> The commit 2a2d1382fe9d ("virtio: Add
improved queue allocation API")
> > >>>>> establishes a new way of allocating virtqueues
(as a part of the effort
> > >>>>> that taught DMA to virtio rings).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> In the future we will want virtio-ccw to use the
DMA API as well.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Let us switch from the legacy method of
allocating virtqueues to
> > >>>>> vring_create_virtqueue() as the first step into
that direction.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at
linux.ibm.com>
> > >>>>> ---
> > >>>>>  drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 30
+++++++++++-------------------
> > >>>>>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 19
deletions(-)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck at
redhat.com>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I'd vote for merging this patch right away for
5.2.
> > >>>
> > >>> So which tree is this going through? mine?
> > >>>     
> > >>
> > >> Christian, what do you think? If the whole series is supposed
to go in
> > >> in one go (which I hope it is), via Martin's tree could
be the simplest
> > >> route IMHO.  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The first three patches are virtio(-ccw) only and the those are
the ones
> > > that I think are ready to go.
> > > 
> > > I'm not feeling comfortable going forward with the remainder
as it
> > > stands now; waiting for some other folks to give feedback. (They
are
> > > touching/interacting with code parts I'm not so familiar
with, and lack
> > > of documentation, while not the developers' fault, does not
make it
> > > easier.)
> > > 
> > > Michael, would you like to pick up 1-3 for your tree directly?
That
> > > looks like the easiest way.  
> > 
> > Agreed. Michael please pick 1-3.
> > We will continue to review 4- first and then see which tree is best.
> 
> Michael, please let me know if you'll pick directly or whether I should
> post a series.
> 
> [Given that the patches are from one virtio-ccw maintainer and reviewed
> by the other, picking directly would eliminate an unnecessary
> indirection :)]
picked them

On Sun, 12 May 2019 12:47:39 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 04:07:44PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 May 2019 15:58:12 +0200
> > Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger at de.ibm.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > On 05.05.19 13:15, Cornelia Huck wrote:  
> > > > On Sat, 4 May 2019 16:03:40 +0200
> > > > Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > >     
> > > >> On Fri, 3 May 2019 16:04:48 -0400
> > > >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com>
wrote:
> > > >>    
> > > >>> On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 11:17:24AM +0200, Cornelia
Huck wrote:
> > > >>>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 20:32:36 +0200
> > > >>>> Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com>
wrote:
> > > >>>>       
> > > >>>>> The commit 2a2d1382fe9d ("virtio: Add
improved queue allocation API")
> > > >>>>> establishes a new way of allocating
virtqueues (as a part of the effort
> > > >>>>> that taught DMA to virtio rings).
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> In the future we will want virtio-ccw to use
the DMA API as well.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Let us switch from the legacy method of
allocating virtqueues to
> > > >>>>> vring_create_virtqueue() as the first step
into that direction.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at
linux.ibm.com>
> > > >>>>> ---
> > > >>>>>  drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 30
+++++++++++-------------------
> > > >>>>>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 19
deletions(-)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck at
redhat.com>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I'd vote for merging this patch right away
for 5.2.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> So which tree is this going through? mine?
> > > >>>       
> > > >>
> > > >> Christian, what do you think? If the whole series is
supposed to go in
> > > >> in one go (which I hope it is), via Martin's tree
could be the simplest
> > > >> route IMHO.    
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > The first three patches are virtio(-ccw) only and the those
are the ones
> > > > that I think are ready to go.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not feeling comfortable going forward with the
remainder as it
> > > > stands now; waiting for some other folks to give feedback.
(They are
> > > > touching/interacting with code parts I'm not so familiar
with, and lack
> > > > of documentation, while not the developers' fault, does
not make it
> > > > easier.)
> > > > 
> > > > Michael, would you like to pick up 1-3 for your tree
directly? That
> > > > looks like the easiest way.    
> > > 
> > > Agreed. Michael please pick 1-3.
> > > We will continue to review 4- first and then see which tree is
best.
> > 
> > Michael, please let me know if you'll pick directly or whether I
should
> > post a series.
> > 
> > [Given that the patches are from one virtio-ccw maintainer and
reviewed
> > by the other, picking directly would eliminate an unnecessary
> > indirection :)]  
> 
> picked them
Thanks!

On 13.05.19 11:52, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Sun, 12 May 2019 12:47:39 -0400
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 04:07:44PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>> On Tue, 7 May 2019 15:58:12 +0200
>>> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger at de.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>    
>>>> On 05.05.19 13:15, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 4 May 2019 16:03:40 +0200
>>>>> Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>>>      
>>>>>> On Fri, 3 May 2019 16:04:48 -0400
>>>>>> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at
redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>     
>>>>>>> On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 11:17:24AM +0200, Cornelia
Huck wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 20:32:36 +0200
>>>>>>>> Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>        
>>>>>>>>> The commit 2a2d1382fe9d ("virtio: Add
improved queue allocation API")
>>>>>>>>> establishes a new way of allocating
virtqueues (as a part of the effort
>>>>>>>>> that taught DMA to virtio rings).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In the future we will want virtio-ccw to
use the DMA API as well.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let us switch from the legacy method of
allocating virtqueues to
>>>>>>>>> vring_create_virtqueue() as the first step
into that direction.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at
linux.ibm.com>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>   drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 30
+++++++++++-------------------
>>>>>>>>>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 19
deletions(-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck at
redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd vote for merging this patch right away
for 5.2.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So which tree is this going through? mine?
>>>>>>>        
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christian, what do you think? If the whole series is
supposed to go in
>>>>>> in one go (which I hope it is), via Martin's tree
could be the simplest
>>>>>> route IMHO.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The first three patches are virtio(-ccw) only and the those
are the ones
>>>>> that I think are ready to go.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not feeling comfortable going forward with the
remainder as it
>>>>> stands now; waiting for some other folks to give feedback.
(They are
>>>>> touching/interacting with code parts I'm not so
familiar with, and lack
>>>>> of documentation, while not the developers' fault, does
not make it
>>>>> easier.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael, would you like to pick up 1-3 for your tree
directly? That
>>>>> looks like the easiest way.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed. Michael please pick 1-3.
>>>> We will continue to review 4- first and then see which tree is
best.
>>>
>>> Michael, please let me know if you'll pick directly or whether
I should
>>> post a series.
>>>
>>> [Given that the patches are from one virtio-ccw maintainer and
reviewed
>>> by the other, picking directly would eliminate an unnecessary
>>> indirection :)]
>>
>> picked them
> 
> Thanks!
> 
Connie,

if I get you right here, you don't need a v2 for the
patches 1 through 3?

Thanks,
Michael