Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] xen_disk: support "direct-io-safe" backend option

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>]

On 28/06/13 17:16, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>> Support backend option "direct-io-safe".  This is documented as
>> follows in the Xen backend specification:
>>
>>   * direct-io-safe
>>   *      Values:         0/1 (boolean)
>>   *      Default Value:  0
>>   *
>>   *      The underlying storage is not affected by the direct IO memory
>>   *      lifetime bug.  See:
>>   *        http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2012-12/msg01154.html
>>   *
>>   *      Therefore this option gives the backend permission to use
>>   *      O_DIRECT, notwithstanding that bug.
>>   *
>>   *      That is, if this option is enabled, use of O_DIRECT is safe,
>>   *      in circumstances where we would normally have avoided it as a
>>   *      workaround for that bug.  This option is not relevant for all
>>   *      backends, and even not necessarily supported for those for
>>   *      which it is relevant.  A backend which knows that it is not
>>   *      affected by the bug can ignore this option.
>>   *
>>   *      This option doesn't require a backend to use O_DIRECT, so it
>>   *      should not be used to try to control the caching behaviour.
>>
>> Also, BDRV_O_NATIVE_AIO is ignored if BDRV_O_NOCACHE, so clarify the
>> default flags passed to the qemu block layer.
>>
>> The original proposal for a "cache" backend option has been dropped
>> because it was believed too wide, especially considering that at the
>> moment the backend doesn't have a way to tell the toolstack that it is
>> capable of supporting it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> George, should I go ahead and commit to the qemu-xen tree?

Yes, I think it's pretty important to have the override in there:

Acked-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>