From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:50760)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1REirF-0005yH-0G
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:35:38 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1REirA-0006AT-Ut
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:35:32 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:26409)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1REirA-0006AK-GA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:35:28 -0400
Message-ID: <4E984819.3010009@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 16:32:57 +0200
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1318581692-18338-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<1318581692-18338-5-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<4E9845E6.3020905@redhat.com> <4E98463A.1010007@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E98463A.1010007@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/4] block: add bdrv_co_discard and
	bdrv_aio_discard support
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com

Am 14.10.2011 16:24, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> On 10/14/2011 04:23 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>>  This similarly adds support for coroutine and asynchronous discard.
>>>
>>>  Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini<pbonzini@redhat.com>
>>
>> Do we really need bdrv_discard and bdrv_aio_discard in the backends? I
>> think it makes sense to have a bdrv_aio_discard() in block.h as AIO
>> generally fits well for device models, but I would just require
>> bdrv_co_discard for any block drivers implementing discard.
> 
> bdrv_discard is needed for now since I wouldn't like to conflate this 
> patch with the qcow2 patch.

Okay, that makes sense. Then I'll drop it when I convert qcow2.

> I can certainly drop aio_discard from the backends, but I'm not sure how 
> heavy can fallocate be (with FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE).  Probably not much, 
> but I think there's no guarantee of O(1) behavior especially with 
> filesystems like ecryptfs.  So you would need to go through the thread 
> pool and aio_discard would come in handy.

Sure, but the coroutine interface should be just as good for
implementing it this way in raw-posix.

Kevin