From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: virtio-dev-return-5476-cohuck=redhat.com@lists.oasis-open.org Sender: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Received: from lists.oasis-open.org (oasis.ws5.connectedcommunity.org [10.110.1.242]) by lists.oasis-open.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF9C1985DA5 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 19:29:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 14:29:40 -0500 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20190220142458-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20190212112547.GC2715@work-vm> <20190212144741.60083682.cohuck@redhat.com> <20190212090121-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20190212164626.GG2715@work-vm> <20190219075415.v4xlw5ywrtmndew5@sirius.home.kraxel.org> <20190219223936-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] Memory sharing device To: Frank Yang Cc: Gerd Hoffmann , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Cornelia Huck , Roman Kiryanov , Stefan Hajnoczi , virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, Greg Hartman List-ID: On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 07:24:20AM -0800, Frank Yang wrote: > IPC though, seems like it would add quite some overhead, > unless there's some generally accepted portable way to run via shared memory > that doesn't also involve busy waiting in a way that burns up the CPU? Let's just say designing host/guest APIs around specific OS limitations doesn't sound like a good direction either. Try talking to Chrome guys, I hear they are using process per plugin for security too? What do they do for portability? -- MST --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org