From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KdRG4-0004ap-7c
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:05:28 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KdRG2-0004aG-P6
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:05:27 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58094 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KdRG2-0004aD-Jv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:05:26 -0400
Received: from il.qumranet.com ([212.179.150.194]:15784)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <avi@qumranet.com>) id 1KdRG1-0008Ds-Pe
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:05:26 -0400
Message-ID: <48C7E22F.3000407@qumranet.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:05:19 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/10] Refactor QEMUFile for live migration
References: <1220989802-13706-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com>	<1220989802-13706-2-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com>
	<5d6222a80809100738i3e3ed54fs666ca6c3225a7c63@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5d6222a80809100738i3e3ed54fs666ca6c3225a7c63@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@redhat.com>, Uri Lublin <uri.lublin@qumranet.com>, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org

Glauber Costa wrote:
>> +static int fd_put_buffer(void *opaque, const uint8_t *buf,
>> +                         int64_t pos, int size)
>> +{
>> +    QEMUFileFD *s = opaque;
>> +    ssize_t len;
>> +
>> +    do {
>> +        len = write(s->fd, buf, size);
>> +    } while (len == -1 && errno == EINTR);
>>     
>
> What about the len == size case ?
>
>   

Should work, no?

>> +
>> +QEMUFile *qemu_fopen_fd(int fd)
>> +{
>> +    QEMUFileFD *s = qemu_mallocz(sizeof(QEMUFileFD));
>>     
>
> can't it fail?
>   

If it does, the entire world will disappear in a black hole.  Qemu isn't 
prepared to handle allocation failures.

> Isn't it possible to abstract the differences between bdrv and file so
> to have a common implementation
> between them? Do you think it's worthwhile ?
>
>   

They're very different.  bdrvs are sector-granularity, random access, 
concurrent, and want dma.  QEMUFiles are byte-granularity, sequential 
access, serial, and aren't too worried about dma (though it could be nice).

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function