From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60153) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UzT6u-0004fv-LE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:53:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UzT6t-0003XB-He for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:53:44 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40452) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UzT6t-0003X3-4H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:53:43 -0400 Message-ID: <51E6AFE6.4010201@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 16:53:26 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1373885375-13601-1-git-send-email-pl@kamp.de> <51E526B3.9070203@redhat.com> <51E52BF8.1000005@kamp.de> <51E52E28.5060701@redhat.com> <51E53137.3020202@kamp.de> <51E534A3.5080907@redhat.com> <51E671C9.6070003@redhat.com> <8733695F-1EA7-4DC7-B697-E54A01205600@kamp.de> <51E676E9.1090406@redhat.com> <27427371-A330-4ECD-A6F4-A295F94C3ECC@kamp.de> <51E6A9A8.3010209@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] qemu-img: conditionally discard target on convert List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Lieven Cc: "kwolf@redhat.com" , "ronniesahlberg@gmail.com" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "stefanha@redhat.com" Il 17/07/2013 16:46, Peter Lieven ha scritto: > > Am 17.07.2013 um 16:26 schrieb Paolo Bonzini : > >> Il 17/07/2013 16:18, Peter Lieven ha scritto: >>>>>>> That would be ok if the patches are merged first. Otherwise I could ask Kevin >>>>>>> to merge my old series (except the iscsi_co_write_zeroes patch as there >>>>>>> obviously is still room for discussion and improvement) and you could tweak >>>>>>> iscsi_co_is_allocated later? >>>>> >>>>> I'll look at your old series, I think the conflicts are relatively >>>>> trivial. But I think that this series must wait for 1.7. >>> Would it be an Option to merge it except for the iscsi_co_is_allocated and the iscsi_co_write_zeroes patch. 3 of the Patches fix potential bugs. >> >> Yes, of course! And I think I can merge them via scsi/next, too. What >> patches are you thinking of exactly? Can you write the numbers? > > Mandatory: > [PATCHv3 07/10] iscsi: fix -ENOSPC in iscsi_create() > [PATCHv3 08/10] iscsi: factor out sector conversions > [PATCHv3 09/10] iscsi: remove support for misaligned nb_sectors in aio_readv > [PATCHv3 10/10] iscsi: assert that sectors are aligned to LUN blocksize Applied all to scsi-next (trivial conflict in patches 8 and 10, solved them myself---just be careful when rebasing). > Optional (non-conflicting patches): > [PATCHv3 01/10] iscsi: add logical block provisioning information to iscsilun > [PATCHv3 05/10] block: add bdrv_write_zeroes() > [PATCHv3 06/10] block/raw: add bdrv_co_write_zeroes 5 and 6 must go through Kevin. As to 1, I suspect if you redo discard along the lines we discussed today it would become heavily different, so I'd rather not take it too. Paolo