From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59636) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XtvRb-0006vW-4S for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 04:33:08 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XtvRQ-00031F-Dh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 04:32:59 -0500 Received: from mx-v6.kamp.de ([2a02:248:0:51::16]:39068 helo=mx01.kamp.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XtvRQ-0002yU-3W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 04:32:48 -0500 Message-ID: <5476EFB9.1070704@kamp.de> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 10:32:41 +0100 From: Peter Lieven MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1414256153-10148-1-git-send-email-pl@kamp.de> <1414256153-10148-4-git-send-email-pl@kamp.de> <20141028111148.GF19211@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com> <545348F9.4050508@kamp.de> <20141031105947.GB10332@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20141031105947.GB10332@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3 3/6] block: add a knob to disable multiwrite_merge List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, famz@redhat.com, benoit@irqsave.net, armbru@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mreitz@redhat.com On 31.10.2014 11:59, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 09:31:53AM +0100, Peter Lieven wrote: >> Am 28.10.2014 um 12:11 schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi: >>> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 06:55:50PM +0200, Peter Lieven wrote: >>> The big question is whether these user-visible interfaces make sense if >>> write merging will be moved from block.c into virtio-blk.c in the >>> future. Once an interface has been added it cannot be removed. >> Would you make it a feature of the virtio-blk-pci device then? > No, I myself feel that it is a generic feature and moving it into the > storage controller emulation code would be a step backwards. As noone else seems to have a strong opinion here I would go for making bdrv_multiwrite a bdrv_multireq and adjust everything accordingly? Ok? Peter