From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755809Ab1EQPev (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 17 May 2011 11:34:51 -0400
Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]:38723 "EHLO
	e34.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755252Ab1EQPet (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 17 May 2011 11:34:49 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 4/6 net-next] vhost: vhost TX zero-copy support
From: Shirley Ma <mashirle@us.ibm.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
        Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20110517152840.GA2389@redhat.com>
References: <1305574484.3456.30.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20110516204540.GD18148@redhat.com>
	 <1305579414.3456.49.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20110516212401.GF18148@redhat.com>
	 <1305606683.10756.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20110517055503.GA26989@redhat.com>
	 <1305645734.10756.14.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20110517152840.GA2389@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 08:34:04 -0700
Message-ID: <1305646444.10756.16.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 (2.28.3-1.fc12) 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 18:28 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Which is the order the descriptors are put on avail ring.
> By design, guest should not depend on used ring entries
> being in order with avail ring (and btw with virtio block,
> they aren't). If it does, it's a bug I think.

Ok, I thought, the order should be maintained.

> > The original code has no problem, because it gets one head and pass
> that
> > head to vhost_add_used one by one once done the copy. So it's in
> > sequence.
> > 
> > This issue can easily recreate without zerocopy patch by simply
> changing
> > the order from "head return vhost_get_vq_desc" when passing to
> > vhost_add_used.
> > 
> > Thanks
> > Shirley
> 
> Ah, did you try that? Could you post this patch pls?
> This seems to imply a bug in guest virtio. 

I am creating the patch against net-next for you to test today.

Thanks
Shirley