Re: [PATCH 1/3] A device for zero-copy based on KVM virtio-net.

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Michael S. Tsirkin
Date: Thursday, April 1, 2010 - 4:08 am

On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 05:27:18PM +0800, Xin Xiaohui wrote:

Well, placement of code is not such a major issue.
It's just that code under drivers/net gets more and better
review than drivers/vhost. I'll try to get Dave's opinion.


There's a ulimit for locked memory. Can we use this, decreasing
the value for rlimit array? We can do this when backend is
enabled and re-increment when backend is disabled.


It's a synchronous non-blocking write.

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH 1/3] A device for zero-copy based on KVM virtio ..., Michael S. Tsirkin, (Thu Apr 1, 4:08 am)
Re: [PATCH 1/3] A device for zero-copy based on KVM virtio ..., Michael S. Tsirkin, (Tue Apr 6, 12:49 am)
Re: [PATCH 1/3] A device for zero-copy based on KVM virtio ..., Michael S. Tsirkin, (Wed Apr 7, 1:15 am)
Re: [PATCH 1/3] A device for zero-copy based on KVM virtio ..., Michael S. Tsirkin, (Wed Apr 7, 4:17 am)