search for: vhost_devic

Move vhost.h to include/linux to allow vhost driver out-of-tree compilation. Currently, this cannot be done properly because the vhost header file is in driver/vhost. To distribute a new vhost driver before it is included in the kernel tree, we need to package it using kmod, dkms, ..., and to compile it out-of-tree using headers provided by the distribution's kernel development package.

Move vhost.h to include/linux to allow vhost driver out-of-tree compilation. Currently, this cannot be done properly because the vhost header file is in driver/vhost. To distribute a new vhost driver before it is included in the kernel tree, we need to package it using kmod, dkms, ..., and to compile it out-of-tree using headers provided by the distribution's kernel development package.

On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 08:10:03PM +0800, Asias He wrote: > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 01:03:42PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 04:38:21PM +0800, Asias He wrote: > > > Currently, vhost-net and vhost-scsi are sharing the vhost core code. > > > However, vhost-scsi shares the code by including the vhost.c file > > > directly. > >

On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 08:10:03PM +0800, Asias He wrote: > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 01:03:42PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 04:38:21PM +0800, Asias He wrote: > > > Currently, vhost-net and vhost-scsi are sharing the vhost core code. > > > However, vhost-scsi shares the code by including the vhost.c file > > > directly. > >

On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 10:47:05AM +0100, Guillaume Missonnier wrote: > Move vhost.h to include/linux to allow vhost driver out-of-tree compilation. > Currently, this cannot be done properly because the vhost header file is in > driver/vhost. > > To distribute a new vhost driver before it is included in the kernel tree, > we need to package it using kmod, dkms, ..., and to

On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 02:37:10PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 08:10:03PM +0800, Asias He wrote: > > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 01:03:42PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 04:38:21PM +0800, Asias He wrote: > > > > Currently, vhost-net and vhost-scsi are sharing the vhost core code. > > > > However,

Asias He (3): vhost: Remove vhost_enable_zcopy in vhost.h vhost: Move VHOST_NET_FEATURES to net.c vhost: Make vhost a separate module drivers/vhost/Kconfig | 8 ++++++++ drivers/vhost/Makefile | 3 ++- drivers/vhost/net.c | 6 ++++++ drivers/vhost/scsi.c | 1 - drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/vhost/vhost.h | 8 ++------ 6

Asias He (3): vhost: Remove vhost_enable_zcopy in vhost.h vhost: Move VHOST_NET_FEATURES to net.c vhost: Make vhost a separate module drivers/vhost/Kconfig | 8 ++++++++ drivers/vhost/Makefile | 3 ++- drivers/vhost/net.c | 6 ++++++ drivers/vhost/scsi.c | 1 - drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/vhost/vhost.h | 8 ++------ 6

In commit ea5d404655ba ("vhost: fix release path lockdep checks"), Michael added a flag to check whether we should hold a lock in vhost_dev_cleanup(), however, in commit 47283bef7ed3 ("vhost: move memory pointer to VQs"), RCU operations have been replaced by mutex, we can remove the no-longer-used `locked' parameter now. Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <jinli.zjl at

Current pre-sorted memory region array has some limitations for future device IOTLB conversion: 1) need extra work for adding and removing a single region, and it's expected to be slow because of sorting or memory re-allocation. 2) need extra work of removing a large range which may intersect several regions with different size. 3) need trick for a replacement policy like LRU To

Current pre-sorted memory region array has some limitations for future device IOTLB conversion: 1) need extra work for adding and removing a single region, and it's expected to be slow because of sorting or memory re-allocation. 2) need extra work of removing a large range which may intersect several regions with different size. 3) need trick for a replacement policy like LRU To

For vhost-scsi with 3 vqs and a workload like that tries to use those vqs like: fio --filename=/dev/sdb --direct=1 --rw=randrw --bs=4k \ --ioengine=libaio --iodepth=128 --numjobs=3 the single vhost worker thread will become a bottlneck and we are stuck at around 500K IOPs no matter how many jobs, virtqueues, and CPUs are used. To better utilize virtqueues and available CPUs, this patch allows

On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 8:45 AM Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On 2018?08?19? 20:11, xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com wrote: > > From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com> > > > > The bitmap of vhost_dev can help us to check if the > > specified poll is scheduled. This patch will be used > > for next two patches. > >

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:39:44PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> Wow new API with no comments anywhere, and no commit log to say what it's good for. Want to know what it does and whether it's correct? You have to read the next patch. So what is the point of splitting it out? It's confusing, and in fact it made you miss a bug.

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:39:44PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> Wow new API with no comments anywhere, and no commit log to say what it's good for. Want to know what it does and whether it's correct? You have to read the next patch. So what is the point of splitting it out? It's confusing, and in fact it made you miss a bug.

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 11:03:59AM -0700, xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com wrote: > From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com> > > This patch changes the way that lock all vqs > at the same, to lock them one by one. It will > be used for next patch to avoid the deadlock. > > Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com> > Acked-by: Jason Wang

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 11:03:59AM -0700, xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com wrote: > From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com> > > This patch changes the way that lock all vqs > at the same, to lock them one by one. It will > be used for next patch to avoid the deadlock. > > Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue at gmail.com> > Acked-by: Jason Wang

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:42:29 +0800 Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> wrote: > Current pre-sorted memory region array has some limitations for future > device IOTLB conversion: > > 1) need extra work for adding and removing a single region, and it's > expected to be slow because of sorting or memory re-allocation. > 2) need extra work of removing a large range

Current pre-sorted memory region array has some limitations for future device IOTLB conversion: 1) need extra work for adding and removing a single region, and it's expected to be slow because of sorting or memory re-allocation. 2) need extra work of removing a large range which may intersect several regions with different size. 3) need trick for a replacement policy like LRU To

.../vhost/vhost.h index afd7729..9c990ea 100644 --- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.h +++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.h @@ -11,9 +11,10 @@ #include <linux/uio.h> #include <linux/virtio_config.h> #include <linux/virtio_ring.h> +#include <linux/srcu.h> #include <asm/atomic.h> -struct vhost_device; +struct vhost_dev; enum { /* Enough place for all fragments, head, and virtio net header. */ @@ -21,29 +22,33 @@ enum { }; struct vhost_work; -typedef void (*vhost_work_fn_t)(struct vhost_work *work); +typedef void (*vhost_work_fn_t)(struct vhost_dev *dev); struct vhost_work { - struc...