search for: desc_iterator

...} > > The above seems unnecessary to me to have three different APIs. > That's the reason to combine them into one virtqueue_add_chain_desc(). > > -- or, do you have a different thought about using the three APIs? > > > Implementation Reference: > > struct desc_iterator { > unsigned int head; > unsigned int tail; > }; > > add_first(*vq, *desc_iterator, *num_free, ..) > { > if (vq->vq.num_free < 1) > return -ENOSPC; > get_desc(&desc_id); > desc[desc_id].flag &= ~_F_NEXT; > desc_iterator...

...} > > The above seems unnecessary to me to have three different APIs. > That's the reason to combine them into one virtqueue_add_chain_desc(). > > -- or, do you have a different thought about using the three APIs? > > > Implementation Reference: > > struct desc_iterator { > unsigned int head; > unsigned int tail; > }; > > add_first(*vq, *desc_iterator, *num_free, ..) > { > if (vq->vq.num_free < 1) > return -ENOSPC; > get_desc(&desc_id); > desc[desc_id].flag &= ~_F_NEXT; > desc_iterator...

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 03:42:35PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote: > On 07/12/2017 09:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > So the way I see it, there are several issues: > > > > - internal wait - forces multiple APIs like kick/kick_sync > > note how kick_sync can fail but your code never checks return code > > - need to re-write the last descriptor - might

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 03:42:35PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote: > On 07/12/2017 09:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > So the way I see it, there are several issues: > > > > - internal wait - forces multiple APIs like kick/kick_sync > > note how kick_sync can fail but your code never checks return code > > - need to re-write the last descriptor - might

...oto start; } else { goto next_one; } The above seems unnecessary to me to have three different APIs. That's the reason to combine them into one virtqueue_add_chain_desc(). -- or, do you have a different thought about using the three APIs? Implementation Reference: struct desc_iterator { unsigned int head; unsigned int tail; }; add_first(*vq, *desc_iterator, *num_free, ..) { if (vq->vq.num_free < 1) return -ENOSPC; get_desc(&desc_id); desc[desc_id].flag &= ~_F_NEXT; desc_iterator->head = desc_id desc_iterator->tail...

...> > > That's the reason to combine them into one virtqueue_add_chain_desc(). > > > > > > -- or, do you have a different thought about using the three APIs? > > > > > > > > > Implementation Reference: > > > > > > struct desc_iterator { > > > unsigned int head; > > > unsigned int tail; > > > }; > > > > > > add_first(*vq, *desc_iterator, *num_free, ..) > > > { > > > if (vq->vq.num_free < 1) > > > return -ENOSPC; > > >...

...> > > That's the reason to combine them into one virtqueue_add_chain_desc(). > > > > > > -- or, do you have a different thought about using the three APIs? > > > > > > > > > Implementation Reference: > > > > > > struct desc_iterator { > > > unsigned int head; > > > unsigned int tail; > > > }; > > > > > > add_first(*vq, *desc_iterator, *num_free, ..) > > > { > > > if (vq->vq.num_free < 1) > > > return -ENOSPC; > > >...

...eems unnecessary to me to have three different APIs. >> That's the reason to combine them into one virtqueue_add_chain_desc(). >> >> -- or, do you have a different thought about using the three APIs? >> >> >> Implementation Reference: >> >> struct desc_iterator { >> unsigned int head; >> unsigned int tail; >> }; >> >> add_first(*vq, *desc_iterator, *num_free, ..) >> { >> if (vq->vq.num_free < 1) >> return -ENOSPC; >> get_desc(&desc_id); >> desc[desc_id]...

...;> That's the reason to combine them into one virtqueue_add_chain_desc(). >>>> >>>> -- or, do you have a different thought about using the three APIs? >>>> >>>> >>>> Implementation Reference: >>>> >>>> struct desc_iterator { >>>> unsigned int head; >>>> unsigned int tail; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> add_first(*vq, *desc_iterator, *num_free, ..) >>>> { >>>> if (vq->vq.num_free < 1) >>>> return -ENOSP...