[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH RDMA support v6: 4/7] Introduce two new capa

From: Paolo Bonzini
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH RDMA support v6: 4/7] Introduce two new capabilities
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:40:20 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130311 Thunderbird/17.0.4

Il 10/04/2013 14:34, Michael R. Hines ha scritto:
> On 04/10/2013 03:50 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 10/04/2013 06:29, address@hidden ha scritto:
>>> From: "Michael R. Hines" <address@hidden>
>>> RDMA performs very slowly with zero-page checking.
>>> Without the ability to disable it, RDMA throughput and
>>> latency promises and high performance links cannot be
>>> fully realized.
>>> On the other hand, dynamic page registration support is also
>>> included in the RDMA protocol. This second capability also
>>> cannot be fully realized without the ability to enable zero
>>> page scanning.
>>> So, we have two new capabilities which work together:
>>> 1. migrate_set_capability check_for_zero on|off (default on)
>>> 2. migrate_set_capability chunk_register_destination on|off (default
>>> off)
>>> Signed-off-by: Michael R. Hines <address@hidden>
>> Michael, please listen to _all_ review comments.
>> 1) I asked you to place check_for_zero in a separate patch.
>> 2) Again, patch 3 cannot compile without this one.  The code should
>> compile after each patch, with and without --enable-rdma.
> My apologies - I misunderstood the request. I am indeed addressing every
> comment.
> When you said separate, I thought you meant a different patch series
> altpgether.
> This is my first time, so the meaning of "separate" was not clear =)
> And yes, patch 3 does in fact compile both with and without --enable-rdma.

How does this:

+const QEMURamControlOps qemu_rdma_write_control = {
+    .before_ram_iterate = qemu_ram_registration_start,
+    .after_ram_iterate = qemu_rdma_registration_stop,
+    .register_ram_iterate = qemu_rdma_registration_handle,
+    .save_page = qemu_rdma_save_page,

compile (and link) successfully without a definition of
qemu_ram_registration_start, which is in patch 5?  (Honest question).

Similarly, patch 5 cannot link without qemu_ram_foreach_block.

Anyway, patch 1 does not compile with --enable-rdma. :)

> You flip-flopped on me =)
> You said conditionalize it, then make a separate patch, then delete it
> altogether =)

Make qemu_set_nonblock conditional, dropping the assert.

Do not touch the implementation of qemu_set_nonblock.  (Yes, this was a


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]