similar to: 30-day Public Review for Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Version 1.0

----- Forwarded message from Chet Ensign <chet.ensign at oasis-open.org> ----- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:54:16 -0400 From: Chet Ensign <chet.ensign at oasis-open.org> To: tc-announce at lists.oasis-open.org, members at lists.oasis-open.org, virtio at lists.oasis-open.org, virtio-comment at lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [members] 15-day Public Review for Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO)

----- Forwarded message from Chet Ensign <chet.ensign at oasis-open.org> ----- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:54:16 -0400 From: Chet Ensign <chet.ensign at oasis-open.org> To: tc-announce at lists.oasis-open.org, members at lists.oasis-open.org, virtio at lists.oasis-open.org, virtio-comment at lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [members] 15-day Public Review for Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO)

OASIS members and other interested parties, The OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) TC members [1] have produced an updated Committee Specification Draft (CSD) and submitted this specification for 15-day public review: Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Version 1.0 Committee Specification Draft 05 / Public Review Draft 05 29 October 2015 Specification Overview: This document describes the

OASIS members and other interested parties, The OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) TC members [1] have produced an updated Committee Specification Draft (CSD) and submitted this specification for 15-day public review: Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Version 1.0 Committee Specification Draft 05 / Public Review Draft 05 29 October 2015 Specification Overview: This document describes the

OASIS members and other interested parties, The Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) TC members [1] have produced an updated Committee Specification Draft (CSD) and submitted this specification for 15-day public review: Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Version 1.0 Committee Specification Draft 04 / Public Review Draft 04 28 May 2015 Specification overview: This document describes the specifications of the

OASIS members and other interested parties, The Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) TC members [1] have produced an updated Committee Specification Draft (CSD) and submitted this specification for 15-day public review: Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) Version 1.0 Committee Specification Draft 04 / Public Review Draft 04 28 May 2015 Specification overview: This document describes the specifications of the

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 02:37:57PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > On 02/08/2017 04:20 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > [...] > > * Prototype > > > > A partial prototype can be found under > > tools/virtio/ringtest/ring.c > > > > Test run: > > [mst at tuck ringtest]$ time ./ring > > real 0m0.399s > > user 0m0.791s > >

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 02:37:57PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > On 02/08/2017 04:20 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > [...] > > * Prototype > > > > A partial prototype can be found under > > tools/virtio/ringtest/ring.c > > > > Test run: > > [mst at tuck ringtest]$ time ./ring > > real 0m0.399s > > user 0m0.791s > >

Hi Michael, > -----Original Message----- > From: virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org] > On Behalf Of Michael S. Tsirkin > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 1:06 PM > To: virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org > Cc: virtualization at lists.linux-foundation.org > Subject: [virtio-dev] packed ring layout proposal v3 > [...] > *

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 09:11:57AM +0000, Liang, Cunming wrote: > Hi Michael, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org] > > On Behalf Of Michael S. Tsirkin > > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 1:06 PM > > To: virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org > > Cc: virtualization at

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 09:11:57AM +0000, Liang, Cunming wrote: > Hi Michael, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org] > > On Behalf Of Michael S. Tsirkin > > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 1:06 PM > > To: virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org > > Cc: virtualization at

Michael, Would you please give an example or two how these two flags DESC_DRIVER and DESC_WRAP are used together? Like others, I am confused by the description and still don?t quite grok it. Steven On 9/25/17, 3:24 PM, "virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org on behalf of Michael S. Tsirkin" <virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org on behalf of mst at redhat.com> wrote: On Wed, Sep

On 02/08/2017 04:20 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: [...] > * Prototype > > A partial prototype can be found under > tools/virtio/ringtest/ring.c > > Test run: > [mst at tuck ringtest]$ time ./ring > real 0m0.399s > user 0m0.791s > sys 0m0.000s > [mst at tuck ringtest]$ time ./virtio_ring_0_9 > real 0m0.503s > user 0m0.999s > sys

On 2019/10/22 ??12:31, Simon Horman wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 05:55:33PM +0800, Zhu, Lingshan wrote: >> On 10/16/2019 5:53 PM, Simon Horman wrote: >>> Hi Zhu, >>> >>> thanks for your patch. >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 09:10:40AM +0800, Zhu Lingshan wrote: > ... > >>>> +static void ifcvf_read_dev_config(struct

After the virtio-iommu device has been probed and the driver is aware of the devices translated by the IOMMU, it can start sending requests to the virtio-iommu device. The operations described here are voluntarily minimalistic, so vIOMMU devices can be as simple as possible to implement, and can be extended with feature bits. I. Overview II. Feature bits III. Device configuration layout

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 06:52:40AM -0400, Jason Wang wrote: > Hi all: > > This series implements packed virtqueues which were described > at [1]. In this version we try to address the performance regression > saw by V2. The root cause is packed virtqueue need more times of > userspace memory accesssing which turns out to be very > expensive. Thanks to the help of 7f466032dc9e

On 2017?09?10? 13:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > This is an update from v2 version. > Changes: > - update event suppression mechanism > - add wrap counter: DESC_WRAP flag in addition to > DESC_DRIVER flag used for validity so device does not have to > write out all used descriptors. Do we have benchmark result to show the advantage of DESC_DRIVER over e.g avail/used

On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 06:00:45AM +0000, Lior Narkis wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org] > > On Behalf Of Michael S. Tsirkin > > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 5:20 AM > > To: virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org > > Cc: virtualization at lists.linux-foundation.org >

This is an update from v1 version. Changes: - update event suppression mechanism - separate options for indirect and direct s/g - lots of new features --- Performance analysis of this is in my kvm forum 2016 presentation. The idea is to have a r/w descriptor in a ring structure, replacing the used and available ring, index and descriptor buffer. * Descriptor ring: Guest adds descriptors with

This is an update from v1 version. Changes: - update event suppression mechanism - separate options for indirect and direct s/g - lots of new features --- Performance analysis of this is in my kvm forum 2016 presentation. The idea is to have a r/w descriptor in a ring structure, replacing the used and available ring, index and descriptor buffer. * Descriptor ring: Guest adds descriptors with