search for: eventidx_addr

...} @@ -350,6 +361,8 @@ static void nvme_init_sq(NvmeSQueue *sq, NvmeCtrl *n, uint64_t dma_addr, QTAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&(sq->req_list), &sq->io_req[i], entry); } sq->timer = timer_new_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL, nvme_process_sq, sq); + sq->db_addr = 0; + sq->eventidx_addr = 0; assert(n->cq[cqid]); cq = n->cq[cqid]; @@ -430,6 +443,8 @@ static void nvme_init_cq(NvmeCQueue *cq, NvmeCtrl *n, uint64_t dma_addr, cq->head = cq->tail = 0; QTAILQ_INIT(&cq->req_list); QTAILQ_INIT(&cq->sq_list); + cq->db_addr = 0; +...

On 18/11/2015 06:47, Ming Lin wrote: > @@ -726,7 +798,11 @@ static void nvme_process_db(NvmeCtrl *n, hwaddr addr, int val) > } > > start_sqs = nvme_cq_full(cq) ? 1 : 0; > - cq->head = new_head; > + /* When the mapped pointer memory area is setup, we don't rely on > + * the MMIO written values to update the head pointer. */ >

On 18/11/2015 06:47, Ming Lin wrote: > @@ -726,7 +798,11 @@ static void nvme_process_db(NvmeCtrl *n, hwaddr addr, int val) > } > > start_sqs = nvme_cq_full(cq) ? 1 : 0; > - cq->head = new_head; > + /* When the mapped pointer memory area is setup, we don't rely on > + * the MMIO written values to update the head pointer. */ >

...Cmd *cmd) { uint64_t db_addr = le64_to_cpu(cmd->prp1); @@ -565,6 +603,7 @@ static uint16_t nvme_set_db_memory(NvmeCtrl *n, const NvmeCmd *cmd) /* Submission queue tail pointer location, 2 * QID * stride. */ sq->db_addr = db_addr + 2 * i * 4; sq->eventidx_addr = eventidx_addr + 2 * i * 4; + nvme_init_sq_eventfd(sq); } if (cq != NULL) { @@ -572,6 +611,7 @@ static uint16_t nvme_set_db_memory(NvmeCtrl *n, const NvmeCmd *cmd) */ cq->db_addr = db_addr + (2 * i + 1) * 4; cq->eventidx_...

Hi Rob & Mihai, I wrote vhost-nvme patches on top of Christoph's NVMe target. vhost-nvme still uses mmio. So the guest OS can run unmodified NVMe driver. But the tests I have done didn't show competitive performance compared to virtio-blk/virtio-scsi. The bottleneck is in mmio. Your nvme vendor extension patches reduces greatly the number of MMIO writes. So I'd like to push it

Hi Rob & Mihai, I wrote vhost-nvme patches on top of Christoph's NVMe target. vhost-nvme still uses mmio. So the guest OS can run unmodified NVMe driver. But the tests I have done didn't show competitive performance compared to virtio-blk/virtio-scsi. The bottleneck is in mmio. Your nvme vendor extension patches reduces greatly the number of MMIO writes. So I'd like to push it

...nt64_t db_addr = le64_to_cpu(cmd->prp1); > @@ -565,6 +603,7 @@ static uint16_t nvme_set_db_memory(NvmeCtrl *n, const NvmeCmd *cmd) > /* Submission queue tail pointer location, 2 * QID * stride. */ > sq->db_addr = db_addr + 2 * i * 4; > sq->eventidx_addr = eventidx_addr + 2 * i * 4; > + nvme_init_sq_eventfd(sq); > } > > if (cq != NULL) { > @@ -572,6 +611,7 @@ static uint16_t nvme_set_db_memory(NvmeCtrl *n, const NvmeCmd *cmd) > */ > cq->db_addr = db_addr + (2 * i + 1)...

...nt64_t db_addr = le64_to_cpu(cmd->prp1); > @@ -565,6 +603,7 @@ static uint16_t nvme_set_db_memory(NvmeCtrl *n, const NvmeCmd *cmd) > /* Submission queue tail pointer location, 2 * QID * stride. */ > sq->db_addr = db_addr + 2 * i * 4; > sq->eventidx_addr = eventidx_addr + 2 * i * 4; > + nvme_init_sq_eventfd(sq); > } > > if (cq != NULL) { > @@ -572,6 +611,7 @@ static uint16_t nvme_set_db_memory(NvmeCtrl *n, const NvmeCmd *cmd) > */ > cq->db_addr = db_addr + (2 * i + 1)...