From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42383) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlwzS-0001Cz-BE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 06:39:31 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlwzR-0005nZ-Gp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 06:39:30 -0400 Sender: Paolo Bonzini References: <1444650651-26227-1-git-send-email-famz@redhat.com> <1444650651-26227-6-git-send-email-famz@redhat.com> <561BC33A.4030108@redhat.com> <20151013093142.GE4906@noname.str.redhat.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <561CDF53.3020404@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:39:15 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151013093142.GE4906@noname.str.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 05/12] block: Introduce "drained begin/end" API List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: qemu-block@nongnu.org, Fam Zheng , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi On 13/10/2015 11:31, Kevin Wolf wrote: > This would mean that once you've sent an I/O request inside a drain > section, you have to expect that more internal I/O might be going on > after the request has completed. If you don't want this, you have to > issue another bdrv_drain() or use a nested bdrv_drained_begin/end() > section. Yes. > Sounds reasonable enough to me, but I guess this should be explicitly > documented. I agree. Perhaps bdrv_drained_begin/end() could be renamed to bdrv_drain_and_lock() / bdrv_unlock()? Paolo