From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40221)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1UPX7P-0005PP-CS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 07:53:44 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1UPX7K-0001Up-8V
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 07:53:43 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:18440)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1UPX7K-0001Ua-0n
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 07:53:38 -0400
Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r39BraHL018909
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 07:53:37 -0400
Message-ID: <5164013A.6030407@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 13:53:30 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1365420597-5506-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<1365420597-5506-5-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<874nfgdj51.fsf@elfo.elfo>
In-Reply-To: <874nfgdj51.fsf@elfo.elfo>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/4] migration: simplify writev vs.
	non-writev logic
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: quintela@redhat.com
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, owasserm@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Il 09/04/2013 13:43, Juan Quintela ha scritto:
>> > @@ -687,12 +685,10 @@ void qemu_put_byte(QEMUFile *f, int v)
>> >      f->bytes_xfer++;
>> >      if (f->ops->writev_buffer) {
>> >          add_to_iovec(f, f->buf + f->buf_index, 1);
>> > -        f->buf_index++;
>> > -    } else {
>> > -        f->buf_index++;
>> > -        if (f->buf_index == IO_BUF_SIZE) {
>> > -            qemu_fflush(f);
>> > -        }
>> > +    }
>> > +    f->buf_index++;
>> > +    if (f->buf_index == IO_BUF_SIZE) {
>> > +        qemu_fflush(f);
>> >      }
>> >  }
> If you follow my advice of moving the call to add_to_iovec() you get
> this one simplified and only one place to do this.

Moving what call?  The apparent complication is because the old logic
was a bit more involute than necessary.  If you look at the code after
the patches, not the patches themselves, you'll see for yourself.

The logic now is:

   add byte
   if using iovs
       add byte to iov list
   if buffer full
       flush

add_to_iovec has no business checking the buffer.  Why should
qemu_put_buffer_async() check the buffer?

The duplication between qemu_put_byte and qemu_put_buffer is a different
topic.  I think it's acceptable in the name of performance, but perhaps
you can just call qemu_put_buffer(f, &c, 1).

Paolo