From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42336) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XgU6I-00027K-9N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 03:43:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XgU69-0000lN-7U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 03:43:26 -0400 Received: from mx-v6.kamp.de ([2a02:248:0:51::16]:49747 helo=mx01.kamp.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XgU68-0000lD-TE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 03:43:17 -0400 Message-ID: <54460E8C.3090904@kamp.de> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 09:43:08 +0200 From: Peter Lieven MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1413815720-29976-1-git-send-email-pl@kamp.de> <544530C6.9080701@redhat.com> <544605EA.7060900@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <544605EA.7060900@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] multiwrite patches for 2.2 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Max Reitz Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, famz@redhat.com, benoit@irqsave.net, jcody@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com On 21.10.2014 09:06, Max Reitz wrote: > On 2014-10-20 at 22:48, Peter Lieven wrote: >> Am 20.10.2014 um 17:56 schrieb Max Reitz : >> >>> On 20.10.2014 at 16:35, Peter Lieven wrote: >>>> This adds some preparing patches for upcoming multiwrite modifications. >>>> I will leave the dangerous patches for after 2.2 release. >>>> >>>> Peter Lieven (4): >>>> block: add accounting for merged requests >>>> block: introduce bdrv_runtime_opts >>>> block: add a knob to disable multiwrite_merge >>>> hw/virtio-blk: add a constant for max number of merged requests >>> In addition, I'd like a test for this (just the parameter would be enough). But I don't object to this series without it. >> Thanks for your comments. I will respin tomorrow. >> >> What exactly would you like to check in a test? > > Just give the parameter and test the query-block against it. I'd test the default, switching it on, off and maybe even specify it for a non-root BDS to see whether that works. Understood. Thanks Peter