From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38269)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1TCPkU-0007Z3-Cw
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 02:51:39 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1TCPkR-0005Pc-18
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 02:51:34 -0400
Received: from mail-wg0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53]:45701)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1TCPkQ-0005PY-Qs
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 02:51:30 -0400
Received: by wgbdr1 with SMTP id dr1so295537wgb.10
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 23:51:29 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5052D3ED.3000706@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 08:51:25 +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>
	<50522C73.5030100@redhat.com> <50522E32.4030406@redhat.com>
	<505237A6.7090202@redhat.com> <50524246.5080800@redhat.com>
	<5052540F.5050501@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <5052540F.5050501@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 23:45, Jeff Cody ha scritto:
> While there are more changes this way, I think it cleans up the code a
> bit.  The advantage is that bs->open_flags actually reflects the open
> flags that are currently in use.  One disadvantage I see is that it
> seems a bit odd to have BDRV_O_CACHE_WCE cleared and BDRV_O_CACHE_WB
> set, until you think about them being intended for different layers.

It's more weird to see BDRV_O_CACHE_WCE set and BDRV_O_CACHE_WB cleared. :)

> Maybe that is part of the underlying problem - there is one open_flags
> variable in the BDS, that has some flags intended for all layers in the
> block stack, and some flags specific to a layer.

Yes, that's true.

Paolo