From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52287)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1ZAKWM-00082w-Gl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2015 12:05:59 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1ZAKWL-0002EM-9P
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2015 12:05:58 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5594015C.20104@redhat.com>
References: <1435761950-26714-1-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com>
	<5593FD66.5020002@redhat.com>
	<CAJSP0QVk+uKK=NPx8R2naGMAqnQfNLsuJJM2iH8xfyaer3_+rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<5594015C.20104@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 17:05:56 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJSP0QWk7fbQurTBcBkdb_vqb7XZpLu9mnQPnLHeQSThuoOA1A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] [PATCH] block/mirror: limit qiov to
	IOV_MAX elements
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu block <qemu-block@nongnu.org>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 01/07/2015 16:59, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> I found it annoying to write it backwards too, but it's for consistency:
>>
>>   if (s->buf_free_count < nb_chunks + added_chunks) {
>>       trace_mirror_break_buf_busy(s, nb_chunks, s->in_flight);
>>       break;
>>   }
>>   if (IOV_MAX < nb_chunks + added_chunks) {
>>       trace_mirror_break_iov_max(s, nb_chunks, added_chunks);
>>       break;
>>   }
>>
>> It's the same type of check as s->buf_free_count (which isn't modified
>> by this loop either so it's a yoda conditional).
>
> Hmm, right.  The problem goes back to:
>
>         while (nb_chunks == 0 && s->buf_free_count < added_chunks) {
>             trace_mirror_yield_buf_busy(s, nb_chunks, s->in_flight);
>             qemu_coroutine_yield();
>         }
>
> where s->buf_free_count _is_ modified by the loop.  The if below:
>
>         if (s->buf_free_count < nb_chunks + added_chunks) {
>             trace_mirror_break_buf_busy(s, nb_chunks, s->in_flight);
>             break;
>         }
>
> is written as a < check for consistency, and the one you add exacerbates
> the problem.  If you want you can change the < to > in the "while" loop
> as well; otherwise the patch is okay as is.

Let's leave it.