From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M61Ux-0006TA-FT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 May 2009 07:59:15 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M61Us-0006RD-6A for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 May 2009 07:59:14 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36113 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M61Ur-0006R5-UA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 May 2009 07:59:09 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.210]:36277) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA1:24) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M61Ur-0005W4-8S for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 May 2009 07:59:09 -0400 Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 13:59:04 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qcow2: Drop synchronous qcow_write() Message-ID: <20090518115904.GA11112@lst.de> References: <1242211593-16495-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> <20090513105917.GA5349@lst.de> <4A0AAA36.9040707@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A0AAA36.9040707@redhat.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: Christoph Hellwig , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 01:08:38PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Christoph Hellwig schrieb: > > Looks good to me, that strary qcow2_write irked me, too. Do you plan > > to kill qcow_read, too? > > Hm, haven't planned that because qcow_read() is used in a much more > common code path, but in theory the very same approach should work there > (and someone seems to have done this already for qcow1?). > > Don't know how the emulation behaves performance wise though, > qcow_read() is used for each cluster allocation. I guess the difference > is negligible? Good question. Probably needs some benchmarking first.