From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:48412)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1TCEau-0000gd-Nm
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:56:57 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1TCEas-00015k-Vb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:56:56 -0400
Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com ([209.85.212.181]:61334)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1TCEas-00015d-P6
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:56:54 -0400
Received: by wibhm2 with SMTP id hm2so2935514wib.10
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 11:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50522C73.5030100@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 20:56:51 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1347548248.git.jcody@redhat.com>
	<01df3140216ac0398bfb3a295c553c42cdf31e5b.1347548248.git.jcody@redhat.com>
	<5052060A.5010304@redhat.com> <50521531.6010308@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <50521531.6010308@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 06/16] block: do not parse
 BDRV_O_CACHE_WB in raw block drivers
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: jcody@redhat.com
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, supriyak@linux.vnet.ibm.com, eblake@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@gmail.com

Il 13/09/2012 19:17, Jeff Cody ha scritto:
>> > 
>> > Why does this matter?  If raw-posix was opened directly (i.e. without
>> > the bs->file indirection) this would cause a writethrough file to be
>> > incorrectly opened as writeback.
>> > 
>> > Paolo
>> > 
> The problem this patch was trying to work around is that
> bdrv_open_common() forces BDRV_O_CACHE_WB (commit e1e9b0ac), but that
> setting is not preserved in bs->open_flags, so it is lost on a reopen.

Perhaps we _should_ preserve that in bs->open_flags, while still using
the initial value of BDRV_O_CACHE_WB to initialize bs->enable_write_cache.

> Is there a scenario currently that has raw-posix opened directly as a
> writethrough file, or were you more concerned with future use?

Not for raw-posix, but IIRC some other protocol is opened directly
without a format on top.  rbd perhaps?  I'm concerned of having to work
around what seems like a bug elsewhere, in multiple protocols.

Paolo