From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54313)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jcody@redhat.com>) id 1TCGO6-0007L1-RH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:51:51 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jcody@redhat.com>) id 1TCGO5-0002ZJ-S9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:51:50 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45407)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jcody@redhat.com>) id 1TCGO5-0002Z7-K0
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:51:49 -0400
Message-ID: <50524742.6070702@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:51:14 -0400
From: Jeff Cody <jcody@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1347548248.git.jcody@redhat.com>
	<392c2852363a2cb420a1c53e7b13e85bc4ebf089.1347548248.git.jcody@redhat.com>
	<505243A9.7050004@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <505243A9.7050004@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 03/16] block: Framework for reopening
	files safely
Reply-To: jcody@redhat.com
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, stefanha@gmail.com, eblake@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, supriyak@linux.vnet.ibm.com

On 09/13/2012 04:35 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 13/09/2012 17:49, Jeff Cody ha scritto:
>> +typedef QSIMPLEQ_HEAD(BlockReopenQueue, BlockReopenQueueEntry) BlockReopenQueue;
>> +
>> +typedef struct BDRVReopenState {
>> +    BlockDriverState *bs;
>> +    int flags;
>> +    void *opaque;
>> +    BlockReopenQueue *queue;
> 
> Do we need the queue pointer here?  Or it can be a separate argument to
> prepare?  Commit and abort don't need it, and it may mess things up a
> bit if commit calls bdrv_reopen_queue (because then the newly-added
> element will get a commit without being prepared).
> 

It could, and should, be a separate argument to prepare(), as you are
correct - commit() and abort() should never use it.

>> +} BDRVReopenState;
>> +
>> +typedef struct BlockReopenQueueEntry {
>> +     bool prepared;
>> +     BDRVReopenState state;
>> +     QSIMPLEQ_ENTRY(BlockReopenQueueEntry) entry;
>> +} BlockReopenQueueEntry;
>> +
> 
> A small change: please move struct BlockReopenQueueEntry to block.c.
> 

OK