From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55820) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZHoM-00080k-2q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 06:06:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZHoD-0005Iu-ME for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 06:06:38 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-x232.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::232]:64388) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VZHoD-0005Ih-Em for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 06:06:29 -0400 Received: by mail-wg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id n12so2064259wgh.17 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 03:06:28 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <5268F121.80200@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 11:06:25 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1382600811-20043-1-git-send-email-pl@kamp.de> <1382600811-20043-18-git-send-email-pl@kamp.de> <5268E41C.9050406@redhat.com> <5268E47B.4060107@kamp.de> In-Reply-To: <5268E47B.4060107@kamp.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv6 17/17] block/raw: copy BlockLimits on raw_open List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Lieven Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, ronniesahlberg@gmail.com Il 24/10/2013 10:12, Peter Lieven ha scritto: >> This must be moved before the introduction of BlockLimits in the iscsi >> driver, or patches that use BlockLimits in block.c will not have any >> effect. > You are the first to mention this. I was thinking the whole series will > be seen as once so it shouldn't matter. In general, series should keep old functionality at all stages. This helps when someone reports a regression, because we can ask them to bisect and not have them burdened by problems in the middle of a series. (It would also help you debugging things, if this series turned out to have a bug). After patch 10 of this series, an iSCSI array will stop receiving split requests for large discards. This may introduce spurious failures. I made the same remark on patch 11, but that patch alone is not enough to restore this; you need this one too for patch 11 to have any effect. So the correct order is patch 17 first, then patch 11, then patch 10. In other word, remove code only after it has become dead. Paolo