From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Move aio implementation out of raw block driver
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 19:31:09 -0300
Message-ID: <20080924223109.GA27289@dmt.cnet>
References: <1222125454-21744-1-git-send-email-ryanh@us.ibm.com> <1222125454-21744-3-git-send-email-ryanh@us.ibm.com> <48D85849.2080302@us.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Ryan Harper <ryanh@us.ibm.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:56981 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1750733AbYIXWcl (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:32:41 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <48D85849.2080302@us.ibm.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 09:45:29PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +typedef struct RawAIOCB {
>> +    BlockDriverAIOCB common;
>> +    struct aiocb posix_aiocb;
>> +    struct RawAIOCB *next;
>> +    int ret;
>> +} RawAIOCB;
>>   
>
> The whole small-object allocator for AIOCBs seems a bit of a premature  
> optimization to me.  It makes this whole thing terribly awkward.   
> Marcelo had a patch at one point to switch the small object allocate to  
> just malloc/free.  Marcelo: any reason you didn't follow up with that 
> patch?

You mean the free object caching? Yeah can't see much point in it.

Will look for it.