From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1JfHsk-0003Xo-Kr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:56:46 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1JfHsi-0003U0-NL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:56:45 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JfHsi-0003Tq-HF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:56:44 -0400
Received: from kanga.kvack.org ([66.96.29.28])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <marcelo@kvack.org>) id 1JfHsi-00049e-8s
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:56:44 -0400
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:59:41 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [kvm-devel] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] QEMU: fsync AIO writes on flush
	request
Message-ID: <20080328165941.GA19155@dmt>
References: <20080328150517.GA18077@dmt> <20080328150703.GA19624@shareable.org>
	<20080328163116.GA18853@dmt>
	<200803281640.55185.paul@codesourcery.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200803281640.55185.paul@codesourcery.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@kvack.org>, kvm-devel <kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 04:40:54PM +0000, Paul Brook wrote:
> On Friday 28 March 2008, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 03:07:03PM +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > > Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > > > Its necessary to guarantee that pending AIO writes have reached stable
> > > > storage when the flush request returns.
> > > >
> > > > Also change fsync() to fdatasync(), since the modification time is not
> > > > critical data.
> > > > +    if (aio_fsync(O_DSYNC, &acb->aiocb) < 0) {
> > > >
> > > >      BDRVRawState *s = bs->opaque;
> > > > -    fsync(s->fd);
> > > > +    raw_aio_flush(bs);
> > > > +    fdatasync(s->fd);
> > > > +
> > > > +    /* We rely on the fact that no other AIO will be submitted
> > > > +     * in parallel, but this should be fixed by per-device
> > > > +     * AIO queues when allowing multiple CPU's to process IO
> > > > +     * in QEMU.
> > > > +     */
> > > > +    qemu_aio_flush();
> > >
> > > I'm a bit confused by this.  Why do you need aio_fsync(O_DSYNC) _and_
> > > synchronous fdatasync() calls?  Aren't they equivalent?
> >
> > fdatasync() will write and wait for completion of dirty file data
> > present in memory.
> >
> > aio_write() only queues data for submission:
> >
> >        The "asynchronous" means that this call returns as soon as the 
> > request has  been  enqueued;  the  write may or may not have completed when
> > the call returns. One tests for completion using aio_error(3).
> 
> Surely you should be using the normal aio notification to wait for the 
> aio_fsync to complete before reporting success to the device.

qemu_aio_flush() will wait for all pending AIO requests (including
aio_fsync) to complete.

Or do you mean something else?