qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
To: Peter Lieven <pl@kamp.de>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	anthony@codemonkey.ws, pbonzini@redhat.com,
	ronniesahlberg@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv4] block/get_block_status: avoid redundant callouts on raw devices
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 17:06:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131002150614.GA14662@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1380723636-18456-1-git-send-email-pl@kamp.de>

On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 04:20:36PM +0200, Peter Lieven wrote:
> if a raw device like an iscsi target or host device is used
> the current implementation makes a second call out to get
> the block status of bs->file. however, the raw driver already
> has called bdrv_get_block_status on bs->file.
> 
> v4: use a flag to detect the raw driver instead of the strncmp
>     hack.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Lieven <pl@kamp.de>
> ---
>  block.c               |    4 ++--
>  block/raw_bsd.c       |    6 +++++-
>  include/block/block.h |    3 +++
>  3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block.c b/block.c
> index 93e113a..7fa2e43 100644
> --- a/block.c
> +++ b/block.c
> @@ -3161,7 +3161,7 @@ static int64_t coroutine_fn bdrv_co_get_block_status(BlockDriverState *bs,
>  
>      if (bs->file &&
>          (ret & BDRV_BLOCK_DATA) && !(ret & BDRV_BLOCK_ZERO) &&
> -        (ret & BDRV_BLOCK_OFFSET_VALID)) {
> +        (ret & BDRV_BLOCK_OFFSET_VALID) && !(ret & BDRV_BLOCK_RAW)) {
>          ret2 = bdrv_co_get_block_status(bs->file, ret >> BDRV_SECTOR_BITS,
>                                          *pnum, pnum);
>          if (ret2 >= 0) {
> @@ -3172,7 +3172,7 @@ static int64_t coroutine_fn bdrv_co_get_block_status(BlockDriverState *bs,
>          }
>      }
>  
> -    return ret;
> +    return ret & ~BDRV_BLOCK_RAW;
>  }
>  
>  /* Coroutine wrapper for bdrv_get_block_status() */
> diff --git a/block/raw_bsd.c b/block/raw_bsd.c
> index d4ace60..a9e0209 100644
> --- a/block/raw_bsd.c
> +++ b/block/raw_bsd.c
> @@ -62,7 +62,11 @@ static int64_t coroutine_fn raw_co_get_block_status(BlockDriverState *bs,
>                                              int64_t sector_num,
>                                              int nb_sectors, int *pnum)
>  {
> -    return bdrv_get_block_status(bs->file, sector_num, nb_sectors, pnum);
> +    int64_t ret = bdrv_get_block_status(bs->file, sector_num, nb_sectors, pnum);
> +    if (ret < 0) {
> +        return ret;
> +    }
> +    return ret | BDRV_BLOCK_RAW;
>  }
>  
>  static int coroutine_fn raw_co_write_zeroes(BlockDriverState *bs,
> diff --git a/include/block/block.h b/include/block/block.h
> index f808550..cb7019b 100644
> --- a/include/block/block.h
> +++ b/include/block/block.h
> @@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ typedef struct BlockDevOps {
>  /* BDRV_BLOCK_DATA: data is read from bs->file or another file
>   * BDRV_BLOCK_ZERO: sectors read as zero
>   * BDRV_BLOCK_OFFSET_VALID: sector stored in bs->file as raw data
> + * BDRV_BLOCK_RAW: used internally to indicate that the request
> + *                 was piped through the raw driver

Sorry I didn't review this earlier but this flag looks hacky and I'm not
confident about merging the patch yet.

The patch makes me wonder if the raw_bsd driver should avoid calling
bs->file itself:

return BDRV_BLOCK_DATA | BDRV_BLOCK_OFFSET_VALID |
       (sector_num << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS);

Let block.c:bdrv_co_get_block_status() call down into bs->file.

The problem is then the protocol cannot report unallocated sectors with
this approach.

I think we want to preserve bs' offset while taking the other flags from
bs->file (DATA, ZERO).

Peter, Paolo: What do you think of this approach?

Stefan

  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-02 15:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-02 14:20 [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv4] block/get_block_status: avoid redundant callouts on raw devices Peter Lieven
2013-10-02 15:06 ` Stefan Hajnoczi [this message]
2013-10-02 15:13   ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-10-02 15:34     ` Peter Lieven
2013-10-02 16:02     ` Peter Lieven
2013-10-02 15:08 ` Eric Blake

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20131002150614.GA14662@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com \
    --to=stefanha@gmail.com \
    --cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
    --cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=pl@kamp.de \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=ronniesahlberg@gmail.com \
    --cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).