From: Nicholas Thomas <nick@bytemark.co.uk>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] nbd: Only try to send flush/discard commands if connected to the NBD server
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:08:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1350990519.16343.255.camel@eboracum.office.bytemark.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5086728B.1010809@redhat.com>
On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 12:33 +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 22.10.2012 13:09, schrieb nick@bytemark.co.uk:
> >
> > This is unlikely to come up now, but is a necessary prerequisite for reconnection
> > behaviour.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nick Thomas <nick@bytemark.co.uk>
> > ---
> > block/nbd.c | 13 +++++++++++--
> > 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> What's the real requirement here? Silently ignoring a flush and
> returning success for it feels wrong. Why is it correct?
>
> Kevin
I just needed to avoid socket operations while s->sock == -1, and
extending the existing case of "can't do the command, so pretend I did
it" to "can't do the command right now, so pretend..." seemed like an
easy way out.
In the Bytemark case, the NBD server always opens the file O_SYNC, so
nbd_co_flush could check in_flight == 0 and return 0/1 based on that;
but I'd be surprised if that's true for all NBD servers. Should we be
returning 1 here for both "not supported" and "can't do it right now",
instead?
/Nick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-23 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-22 11:09 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/3] NBD reconnection behaviour nick
2012-10-22 11:09 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] nbd: Only try to send flush/discard commands if connected to the NBD server nick
2012-10-23 10:33 ` Kevin Wolf
2012-10-23 11:08 ` Nicholas Thomas [this message]
2012-10-23 11:26 ` Kevin Wolf
2012-10-23 15:02 ` Jamie Lokier
2012-10-24 12:16 ` Nicholas Thomas
2012-10-24 12:57 ` Kevin Wolf
2012-10-24 14:32 ` Jamie Lokier
2012-10-24 15:16 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-10-25 6:36 ` Kevin Wolf
2012-10-25 17:09 ` Jamie Lokier
2012-10-26 7:59 ` Kevin Wolf
2012-10-24 14:03 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-10-24 14:10 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-10-24 14:12 ` Nicholas Thomas
2012-10-22 11:09 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] nbd: Explicitly disconnect and fail inflight I/O requests on error, then reconnect next I/O request nick
2012-10-23 10:40 ` Kevin Wolf
2012-10-24 14:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-10-22 11:09 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] nbd: Move reconnection attempts from each new I/O request to a 5-second timer nick
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=1350990519.16343.255.camel@eboracum.office.bytemark.co.uk \
--to=nick@bytemark.co.uk \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).