From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/3] Move aio implementation out of raw
 block driver
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 11:06:27 -0500
Message-ID: <48D91403.8090007@us.ibm.com>
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> <20080923143909.GK31395@us.ibm.com> <48D902EB.8070701@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Ryan Harper <ryanh@us.ibm.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from e6.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.146]:53752 "EHLO e6.ny.us.ibm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751005AbYIWQJG (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:09:06 -0400
Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236])
	by e6.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m8NGBZe2022197
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:11:35 -0400
Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (d01av01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.215])
	by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id m8NG7PMJ129104
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:07:25 -0400
Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1])
	by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m8NG7Oj6021880
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:07:24 -0400
In-Reply-To: <48D902EB.8070701@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Ryan Harper wrote:
>   
>>> So what happens if !defined(CONFIG_AIO)?  By my reading of the code, 
>>> aio_drv will be NULL and this will SEGV.
>>>       
>> raw_aio_read/write/cancel aren't included in the bdrv structure unless
>> CONFIG_AIO is defined.  Rather in bdrv_register, the aio emulation
>> functions are used instead.
>>     
>
> How about providing a aio interface implementation which simply uses
> read/write syscalls (thereby not being really async obviously)?  Then
> use that as fallback instead of aio emulation?  And also drop CONFIG_AIO
> then?
>   

Yeah, this is basically what block-raw-posix does today.  I was thinking 
the same thing.  I was also thinking that you could do an aio 
implementation for win32 and possibly reunify block-raw-posix and 
block-raw-linux.

But before going down this route, I want to see if linux-aio is really 
the right tool for the job.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> cheers,
>   Gerd
>