From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:45272) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RnBGx-0007ZL-QC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 10:48:37 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RnBGs-0002vh-3W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 10:48:31 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48769) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RnBGr-0002va-S3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 10:48:26 -0500 Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:47:06 -0200 From: Marcelo Tosatti Message-ID: <20120117154706.GA27038@amt.cnet> References: <1326460457-19446-1-git-send-email-stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1326460457-19446-14-git-send-email-stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4F157728.1060702@redhat.com> <20120117135046.GA24928@amt.cnet> <4F158029.50709@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F158029.50709@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 13/15] block: add support for partial streaming List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: Luiz Capitulino , Stefan Hajnoczi , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 03:05:29PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 17.01.2012 14:50, schrieb Marcelo Tosatti: > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 02:27:04PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote: > >> Am 13.01.2012 14:14, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi: > >>> From: Marcelo Tosatti > >>> > >>> Add support for streaming data from an intermediate section of the > >>> image chain (see patch and documentation for details). > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Tosatti > >>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi > >> > >> I'm afraid that in the review for the previous version I couldn't see > >> the wood for the trees... This does limit the COR requests issued by > >> image streaming, but not those issued by the guest. Am I missing > >> something? This is not what we want, is it? > > > > What you mean "limit the COR requests"? > > base -> sn1 -> sn2 > > You only want to copy the content of sn1 into sn2 and keep base. The > streaming coroutine is doing the right thing because it checks > is_allocated_base. However, if it is the guest that reads some data from > base, COR copies it into sn2 even though it's in the common base file. Ah, yes. > Maybe streaming shouldn't enable normal COR on images, but instead of > calling bdrv_co_read it could directly call bdrv_co_copy_on_readv(). That would work.