From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>
To: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>,
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] block/xen-blkfront: Handle non-indirect grant with 64KB pages
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 18:32:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5644DB57.7090901@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5644D973.9000809@citrix.com>
On 12/11/15 18:24, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> So if one get EOPNOTSUPP the other will get too.
>
> That's why I said that I think it's not currently possible. IMHO, it's
> fine as it is now.
>
> The only scenario I can think of that can lead to that combination is
> that we migrate the guest and one request gets processed by one backend
> that supports the operation, while the other request get processed by a
> backend that doesn't support it.
>
> With your current implementation we would return an error code anyway,
> which is not that bad I guess.
hmmm ... We would return an error to the block layer rather than 0
because the operation is not supported.
That reminds me that blkif_recover needs to be fixed to support
splitting request. I haven't done it because ARM doesn't yet support
suspend/resume (CCing Ian who is working on it).
>>>
>>> Should s->status be able to store all the possible return codes from the
>>> response (OK/ERROR/NOTSUPP)?
>>
>> That could would work. However, how do you decide which will be the
>> final status?
>
> It should be the most restrictive one, for example if we have ERROR and
> NOTSUPP we should return ERROR, while if we have OK and NOTSUPP we
> should return NOTSUPP.
I will give a look.
--
Julien Grall
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-12 18:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-19 14:19 [PATCH v2 0/2] block/xen-blkfront: Support non-indirect grant with 64KB page granularity Julien Grall
2015-10-19 14:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] block/xen-blkfront: Introduce blkif_ring_get_request Julien Grall
2015-10-19 14:19 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] block/xen-blkfront: Handle non-indirect grant with 64KB pages Julien Grall
2015-11-12 16:40 ` Roger Pau Monné
2015-11-12 17:30 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall
2015-11-12 17:51 ` Roger Pau Monné
2015-11-12 18:04 ` Julien Grall
2015-11-12 18:24 ` Roger Pau Monné
2015-11-12 18:32 ` Julien Grall [this message]
2015-11-12 16:45 ` Roger Pau Monné
[not found] ` <5640C114.5080104@citrix.com>
[not found] ` <20151109160523.GE8121@char.us.oracle.com>
2015-11-18 17:34 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/2] block/xen-blkfront: Support non-indirect grant with 64KB page granularity Julien Grall
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5644DB57.7090901@citrix.com \
--to=julien.grall@citrix.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox