From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Llnud-0003IB-Rw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:26:11 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LlnuY-0003Hl-DZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:26:10 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39322 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LlnuY-0003Hi-7h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:26:06 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:44206) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LlnuY-0007tg-12 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:26:06 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:26:04 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH][RFC] Linux AIO support when using O_DIRECT 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 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <49C7B620.8030203@redhat.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, 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.