Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 16:55:14 -0600 From: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@FreeBSD.org> To: Colin Percival <cperciva@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "freebsd-xen@freebsd.org" <freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: breakage in blkfront with ring_pages > 1 Message-ID: <4E14E7D2.9040708@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4E13E111.9070005@freebsd.org> References: <4DF18EE5.5090704@freebsd.org> <4DF27EFF.5060005@FreeBSD.org> <4E13B6E9.9070202@freebsd.org> <4E13C2A4.5040202@FreeBSD.org> <4E13CB8F.8000009@freebsd.org> <4E13E111.9070005@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7/5/11 10:14 PM, Colin Percival wrote: > On 07/05/11 19:42, Colin Percival wrote: > > On 07/05/11 19:04, Justin T. Gibbs wrote: > >> On 7/5/11 7:14 PM, Colin Percival wrote: > >>> Maybe the right option is to have a loader tunable dev.xn.linuxback to > >>> control which version of the protocol is used? > >> > >> What a mess. > > > > Yep. Mess or not, shall I go ahead with having a loader tunable control this, > > or can you think of a better solution? > > Does anyone object to the attached patch? It keeps the differing behaviour to > a minimum -- we MUST set ring-ref with a FreeBSD blkback, and we MUST NOT set > it with a linux blkback -- but otherwise errs in the direction of setting more > variables than are needed, to maximize the possibility of a future blkback > being compatible with both blkback_is_linux=0 and blkback_is_linux=1. It would be better to just change the FreeBSD blkback driver to be compatible with the RedHat convention. I'm still unclear on why the current FreeBSD blkfront driver believes that it can use more than one page in your configuration given that the RedHat blkfront doesn't advertise this capability in a way that the FreeBSD blkfront understands (max-ring-pages isn'te set by blkback). Did you do something to force blkfront to use more than one page? -- Justin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E14E7D2.9040708>