On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 08:39:40 +0300, Tsirkin, Michael wrote:
>> Looks like the discussions tapered off, but do you have a plan to
>> implement this if people are eventually fine with it? We want to
>> extend this to support multiple VMs.
>
> Absolutely. We are just back from holidays, and starte
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 02:42:34PM -0700, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> Looks like the discussions tapered off, but do you have a plan to
> implement this if people are eventually fine with it? We want to
> extend this to support multiple VMs.
Absolutely. We are just back from holidays,
Hi Michael,
Looks like the discussions tapered off, but do you have a plan to
implement this if people are eventually fine with it? We want to
extend this to support multiple VMs.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 05:39:07PM +0200, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 09.09.2015 09:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 02:38:34PM +0200, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> >> Coming late to the party,
> >>
> >> On 31.08.2015 16:11, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> Hello!
> >>> During t
On 09.09.2015 09:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 02:38:34PM +0200, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> Coming late to the party,
>>
>> On 31.08.2015 16:11, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>> During the KVM forum, we discussed supporting virtio on top
>>> of ivshmem. I have cons
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 02:38:34PM +0200, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> Coming late to the party,
>
> On 31.08.2015 16:11, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Hello!
> > During the KVM forum, we discussed supporting virtio on top
> > of ivshmem. I have considered it, and came up with an alternative
> > that
Coming late to the party,
On 31.08.2015 16:11, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Hello!
> During the KVM forum, we discussed supporting virtio on top
> of ivshmem. I have considered it, and came up with an alternative
> that has several advantages over that - please see below.
> Comments welcome.
as J
On 2015-09-03 10:37, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 10:21:28AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2015-09-03 10:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>
>>> IOW if you wish, you actually can create a shared memory device,
>>> make it accessible to the IOMMU and place some or all
>>> data
On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 10:21:28AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2015-09-03 10:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 06:28:28PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2015-09-01 18:02, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:34:37PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> O
On 2015-09-03 10:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 06:28:28PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2015-09-01 18:02, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:34:37PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2015-09-01 16:34, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 20
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 09:45:45PM -0700, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> BTW, can you please take a look at the following URL to see my
> understanding is correct? Our engineers are saying that they are not
> really sure if they understood your proposal (especially around
> IOMMU), and I drew a figure, add
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 06:28:28PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2015-09-01 18:02, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:34:37PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2015-09-01 16:34, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 04:09:44PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> O
BTW, can you please take a look at the following URL to see my
understanding is correct? Our engineers are saying that they are not
really sure if they understood your proposal (especially around
IOMMU), and I drew a figure, adding notes...
https://wiki.opnfv.org/vm2vm_mst
Thanks,
--
Jun
Intel O
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:01:07PM -0700, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > On 2015-09-01 18:02, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> ...
> >> You don't need to be able to map all guest memory if you know
> >> guest won't try to allow device access to all of it.
>
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2015-09-01 18:02, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
...
>> You don't need to be able to map all guest memory if you know
>> guest won't try to allow device access to all of it.
>> It's a question of how good is the bus address allocator.
>
> But those
My previous email has been bounced by virtio-...@lists.oasis-open.org.
I tried to subscribed it, but to no avail...
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:35:55AM -0700, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wr
On 2015-09-01 18:02, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:34:37PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2015-09-01 16:34, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 04:09:44PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2015-09-01 11:24, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 20
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:34:37PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2015-09-01 16:34, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 04:09:44PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2015-09-01 11:24, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:11:52AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> O
On 2015-09-01 16:34, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 04:09:44PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2015-09-01 11:24, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:11:52AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2015-09-01 10:01, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 20
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 04:09:44PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2015-09-01 11:24, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:11:52AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2015-09-01 10:01, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 09:35:21AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> L
On 2015-09-01 11:24, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:11:52AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2015-09-01 10:01, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 09:35:21AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Leaving all the implementation and interface details aside, this
d
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:11:52AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2015-09-01 10:01, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 09:35:21AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Leaving all the implementation and interface details aside, this
> >> discussion is first of all about two fundamentally
On 2015-09-01 10:01, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 09:35:21AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Leaving all the implementation and interface details aside, this
>> discussion is first of all about two fundamentally different approaches:
>> static shared memory windows vs. dynamicall
.oasis-open.org; Jan Kiszka;
> > claudio.font...@huawei.com; qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Linux
> > Virtualization; opnfv-tech-disc...@lists.opnfv.org
> > Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] rfc: vhost user enhancements for vm2vm
> > communication
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:11 AM
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:35:55AM -0700, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Hello!
> > During the KVM forum, we discussed supporting virtio on top
> > of ivshmem. I have considered it, and came up with an alternative
> > that has several advantag
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 09:35:21AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2015-08-31 16:11, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Hello!
> > During the KVM forum, we discussed supporting virtio on top
> > of ivshmem.
>
> No, not on top of ivshmem. On top of shared memory. Our model is
> different from the simplist
On 2015-08-31 16:11, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Hello!
> During the KVM forum, we discussed supporting virtio on top
> of ivshmem.
No, not on top of ivshmem. On top of shared memory. Our model is
different from the simplistic ivshmem.
> I have considered it, and came up with an alternative
> tha
s.oasis-open.org; Jan Kiszka;
> claudio.font...@huawei.com; qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Linux
> Virtualization; opnfv-tech-disc...@lists.opnfv.org
> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] rfc: vhost user enhancements for vm2vm
> communication
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Hello!
> During the KVM forum, we discussed supporting virtio on top
> of ivshmem. I have considered it, and came up with an alternative
> that has several advantages over that - please see below.
> Comments welcome.
Hi Michael,
I like
Hello!
During the KVM forum, we discussed supporting virtio on top
of ivshmem. I have considered it, and came up with an alternative
that has several advantages over that - please see below.
Comments welcome.
-
Existing solutions to userspace switching between VMs on the
same host are vhost-u
30 matches
Mail list logo
