On 10/17/2011 01:31 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > > Just to make sure I understand this completely: a hash table indexed by > > MSIMessage in kvm code would avoid this? You'd just allocate on demand > > when seeing a new MSIMessage and free on an LRU basis, avoiding pinned > > entries. > > > > I'm not advocating this (yet), just want to understand the tradeoffs. > > Practically, that may work. I just wanted to avoid searching. And for > static routes (irqfd, device assigment) you still need caches anyway, so > I decided to use them consistently.
Okay. Even if we do decide to go for transparent caches, it should be done after this is merged, to avoid excessive churn. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
