From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48B41C433E0 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 05:39:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DD8E2087E for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 05:39:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727775AbhADFi5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jan 2021 00:38:57 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:34827 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727740AbhADFi5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jan 2021 00:38:57 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1609738651; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=iOL2OUOk4IJKETaoW+6g8PoYWJiORbk8mBDrcZMi3t8=; b=O1CvDSzr+UW0dAee0p5HFwQOPCQXs6DYNaFQto5+szRzWPHXGjh7KoKx7BSmAFYfc8deIY i/h5/H7bOo1ALVnrkdhwUfkpOLIZBDfro0X2VBRuOeLH9i/U6UHt1LCfle1RB+M5j/3Job k1tpmUuRwCilK0ryU3QfYx8BJFv4Jts= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-304-6X9DrehoMriwAPMs0wq6Kg-1; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 00:37:27 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 6X9DrehoMriwAPMs0wq6Kg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E86391800D41; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 05:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.72.13.91] (ovpn-13-91.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.13.91]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AA065FC29; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 05:37:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] KVM: add initial support for ioregionfd blocking read/write operations To: Elena Afanasova , kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: stefanha@redhat.com, jag.raman@oracle.com, elena.ufimtseva@oracle.com References: <72556405-8501-26bc-4939-69e312857e91@redhat.com> <90e04958a3f57bbc1b0fcee4810942f031640a05.camel@gmail.com> From: Jason Wang Message-ID: <9c1a10a5-2863-02af-bd9f-8a7b77f7e382@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 13:37:19 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <90e04958a3f57bbc1b0fcee4810942f031640a05.camel@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On 2021/1/4 上午4:37, Elena Afanasova wrote: > On Thu, 2020-12-31 at 11:46 +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> On 2020/12/29 下午6:02, Elena Afanasova wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Elena Afanasova >>> --- >>> virt/kvm/ioregion.c | 157 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 157 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/ioregion.c b/virt/kvm/ioregion.c >>> index a200c3761343..8523f4126337 100644 >>> --- a/virt/kvm/ioregion.c >>> +++ b/virt/kvm/ioregion.c >>> @@ -4,6 +4,33 @@ >>> #include >>> #include "eventfd.h" >>> >>> +/* Wire protocol */ >>> +struct ioregionfd_cmd { >>> + __u32 info; >>> + __u32 padding; >>> + __u64 user_data; >>> + __u64 offset; >>> + __u64 data; >>> +}; >>> + >> I wonder do we need a seq in the protocol. It might be useful if we >> allow a pair of file descriptors to be used for multiple different >> ranges. >> > I think it might be helpful in the case of out-of-order requests. > In the case of in order requests seq field seems not to be necessary > since there will be cmds/replies serialization. I’ll include the > synchronization code in a RFC v2 series. See my reply to V1. It might be helpful for the case of using single ioregionfd for multiple ranges. Thanks > >> Thanks >> >> >>> +struct ioregionfd_resp { >>> + __u64 data; >>> + __u8 pad[24]; >>> +};