From: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>,
Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
qemu block <qemu-block@nongnu.org>, Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.9-rc5 v2] block: Drain BH in bdrv_drained_begin
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 16:36:25 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170418083625.GA22853@lemon.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7ee25e94-d8c1-cc29-7d39-5ecce08ecd90@redhat.com>
On Tue, 04/18 10:18, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 17/04/2017 10:27, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > At this point it's even unclear to me what should be the plan for 2.9. v1 IMO
> > was the least intrusive, but didn't cover bdrv_drain_all_begin. v2 has this
> > controversial "aio_poll(ctx_, false)",
>
> v1 has it too:
>
> - bdrv_drain_recurse(bs);
> + while (true) {
> + if (!bdrv_drain_recurse(bs) &&
> + !aio_poll(bdrv_get_aio_context(bs), false)) {
> + break;
> + }
> + }
Yes you are right.
On the other hand, the fact that in v2 I had to add bdrv_ref/bdrv_unref around
the recursive bdrv_drain_recurse() call makes me worry a little - I assume the
same problem exists in v1 and is just latent. So maybe merging v2 is better.
>
> I don't have any particular preference. Both patches are self contained
> and easy to revert when the underlying root cause is fixed.
>
Fam
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-18 8:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-14 8:02 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.9-rc5 v2] block: Drain BH in bdrv_drained_begin Fam Zheng
2017-04-14 8:10 ` Fam Zheng
2017-04-14 8:45 ` [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] " Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-04-14 8:51 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-04-14 17:10 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-04-16 9:37 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-04-17 3:33 ` Fam Zheng
2017-04-18 8:16 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2017-04-17 8:27 ` [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] " Fam Zheng
2017-04-17 11:21 ` Jeff Cody
2017-04-18 8:18 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2017-04-18 8:36 ` Fam Zheng [this message]
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=20170418083625.GA22853@lemon.lan \
--to=famz@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@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).