From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH][RFC] Linux AIO support when using O_DIRECT
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:26:04 -0400
Message-ID: <20090323172604.GA29449@infradead.org>
References: <1237823124-6417-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> <49C7B620.8030203@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:35551 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1760243AbZCWR0H (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:26:07 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <49C7B620.8030203@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 06:17:36PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Instead of introducing yet another layer of indirection, you could add  
> block-raw-linux-aio, which would be registered before block-raw-posix  
> (which is realy block-raw-threadpool...), and resist a ->probe() if  
> caching is enabled.

Exactly the kind of comment I was about to make, but I need to read a
little deeper to understand all the details.

But my gut feeling is that this abstraction doesn't help us very much,
especially with Avi's aiocb pools in place.