From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53505)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1WFOQ3-0005Az-Gh
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 08:39:41 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1WFOPx-0007Io-GF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 08:39:35 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:29364)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1WFOPx-0007HN-8s
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 08:39:29 -0500
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:30:40 +0800
From: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20140217133040.GE1428@T430.redhat.com>
References: <1390972061-26560-1-git-send-email-famz@redhat.com>
	<1390972061-26560-3-git-send-email-famz@redhat.com>
	<20140213123750.GC4547@irqsave.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140213123750.GC4547@irqsave.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v13 02/14] block: Introduce op_blockers to
 BlockDriverState
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= Canet <benoit.canet@irqsave.net>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, rjones@redhat.com, imain@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com

On Thu, 02/13 13:37, Beno=EEt Canet wrote:
> The Wednesday 29 Jan 2014 =E0 13:07:29 (+0800), Fam Zheng wrote :
> > diff --git a/include/block/block_int.h b/include/block/block_int.h
> > index 0bcf1c9..4e558d0 100644
> > --- a/include/block/block_int.h
> > +++ b/include/block/block_int.h
> > @@ -270,6 +270,8 @@ typedef struct BlockLimits {
> >      size_t opt_mem_alignment;
> >  } BlockLimits;
> > =20
> > +typedef struct BdrvOpBlocker BdrvOpBlocker;
> > +
> >  /*
> >   * Note: the function bdrv_append() copies and swaps contents of
> >   * BlockDriverStates, so if you add new fields to this struct, pleas=
e
> > @@ -361,6 +363,9 @@ struct BlockDriverState {
> > =20
> >      QLIST_HEAD(, BdrvTrackedRequest) tracked_requests;
> > =20
> > +    /* operation blockers */
> > +    QLIST_HEAD(, BdrvOpBlocker) op_blockers[BLOCK_OP_TYPE_MAX];
>=20
> Is a loop doing QLIST_INIT on this array elements required ?
>=20

Yes, we better do it.

Thanks,
Fam