From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44088) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TtGx5-000176-Va for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 07:09:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TtGx0-0005Bz-R8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 07:09:43 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:62706) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TtGx0-0005Bn-JX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 07:09:38 -0500 Message-ID: <50EEAF7D.8070901@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 13:09:33 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <50EE8810.7080507@dlhnet.de> <8738y9l3ka.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <50EE9E1B.2010805@redhat.com> <87txqpgsq7.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] block: init bs->io_base correctly to avoid locking List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Lieven Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, Markus Armbruster , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" Il 10/01/2013 12:57, Peter Lieven ha scritto: > Paolo, if you agree I would resubmit the patch (using your description). Using the description is fine. Also at least remove the memset. > I would not directly collapse the code to as its not obvious what > bdrv_exceed_io_limits(bs, 0, 0, NULL); > is doing. Maybe this could be done in a later patch. You're right that it's not obvious. But perhaps we do not need to start a slice at all when iolimits are set. That is, do bs->slice_start = bs->slice_end = bs->slice_time = 0; or perhaps even nothing at all since bdrv_io_limits_disable should have written those exact values. Paolo