From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MJ3Gs-0001VL-0g
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:30:34 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MJ3Gm-0001Rs-SG
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:30:33 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45519 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MJ3Gm-0001Rp-I7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:30:28 -0400
Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:35583)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <jamie@shareable.org>) id 1MJ3Gl-0002a7-0u
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:30:28 -0400
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:30:19 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] block-raw: Make cache=off default again
Message-ID: <20090623103019.GA14437@shareable.org>
References: <1245669483-7076-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com>
	<20090622113524.GA13583@lst.de> <4A3F6EA3.2010303@redhat.com>
	<4A3F7139.20401@redhat.com> <4A3F79C0.6000804@redhat.com>
	<4A3F7B87.6000605@redhat.com> <4A3F7E32.8090905@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4A3F7E32.8090905@redhat.com>
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: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Kevin Wolf wrote:
> What happens with virtio I still need to understand. Obviously, as soon
> as virtio decides to fall back to 4k requests, performance becomes
> terrible.

Does emulating a disk with 4k sector size instead of 512 bytes help this?

-- Jamie