From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58423) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W3m1A-0004Ei-20 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 07:25:58 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W3m14-0002za-2e for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 07:25:51 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4683) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W3m13-0002zU-Pa for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 07:25:45 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:25:34 +0100 From: Kevin Wolf Message-ID: <20140116122534.GD3369@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> References: <1386940979-3824-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> <1386940979-3824-14-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1386940979-3824-14-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 13/24] block: Introduce bdrv_co_do_pwritev() List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, pl@kamp.de, stefanha@redhat.com Am 13.12.2013 um 14:22 hat Kevin Wolf geschrieben: > This is going to become the bdrv_co_do_preadv() equivalent for writes. > In this patch, however, just a function taking byte offsets is created, > it doesn't align anything yet. > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf > --- > block.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/block.c b/block.c > index 385fb8a..a80db2e 100644 > --- a/block.c > +++ b/block.c > @@ -3010,8 +3010,8 @@ static int coroutine_fn bdrv_aligned_pwritev(BlockDriverState *bs, > /* > * Handle a write request in coroutine context > */ > -static int coroutine_fn bdrv_co_do_writev(BlockDriverState *bs, > - int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors, QEMUIOVector *qiov, > +static int coroutine_fn bdrv_co_do_pwritev(BlockDriverState *bs, > + int64_t offset, unsigned int bytes, QEMUIOVector *qiov, > BdrvRequestFlags flags) > { > int ret; > @@ -3022,21 +3022,32 @@ static int coroutine_fn bdrv_co_do_writev(BlockDriverState *bs, > if (bs->read_only) { > return -EACCES; > } > - if (bdrv_check_request(bs, sector_num, nb_sectors)) { > + if (bdrv_check_byte_request(bs, offset, bytes)) { > return -EIO; > } > > /* throttling disk I/O */ > if (bs->io_limits_enabled) { > - bdrv_io_limits_intercept(bs, nb_sectors, true); > + bdrv_io_limits_intercept(bs, bytes << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS, true); > } Oh nice, this shifts in the wrong direction. If somebody feels like writing a test case, something testing that I/O throttling actually throttles would be useful... Kevin