On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:19:16AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 09:52:37 +0100
> Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 08:11:18PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > > * Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 03:33:20PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > +static void vuf_device_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + VirtIODevice *vdev = VIRTIO_DEVICE(dev);
> > > > > + VHostUserFS *fs = VHOST_USER_FS(dev);
> > > > > + unsigned int i;
> > > > > + size_t len;
> > > > > + int ret;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (!fs->conf.chardev.chr) {
> > > > > + error_setg(errp, "missing chardev");
> > > > > + return;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (!fs->conf.tag) {
> > > > > + error_setg(errp, "missing tag property");
> > > > > + return;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > + len = strlen(fs->conf.tag);
> > > > > + if (len == 0) {
> > > > > + error_setg(errp, "tag property cannot be empty");
> > > > > + return;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > + if (len > sizeof_field(struct virtio_fs_config, tag)) {
> > > > > + error_setg(errp, "tag property must be %zu bytes or less",
> > > > > + sizeof_field(struct virtio_fs_config, tag));
> > > > > + return;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (fs->conf.num_queues == 0) {
> > > > > + error_setg(errp, "num-queues property must be larger than
> > > > > 0");
> > > > > + return;
> > > > > + }
> > > >
> > > > The strange thing is that actual # of queues is this number + 2.
> > > > And this affects an optimal number of vectors (see patch 2).
> > > > Not sure what a good solution is - include the
> > > > mandatory queues in the number?
> > > > Needs to be documented in some way.
> > >
> > > Should we be doing nvectors the same way virtio-scsi-pci does it;
> > > with a magic 'unspecified' default where it sets the nvectors based on
> > > the number of queues?
> > >
> > > I think my preference is not to show the users the mandatory queues.
> >
> > I agree. Users want to control multiqueue, not on the absolute number
> > of virtqueues including mandatory queues.
>
> I agree as well, but let me advocate again for renaming this to
> 'num_request_queues' or similar to make it more obvious what this number
> actually means.Good idea.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
