Re: [Qemu-block] [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-stable] [PATCH v7 0/8] block: Mirror discarded sectors

[Fam Zheng]

On Fri, 06/26 15:36, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> >>There is no problem, the observasion by Andrey was just that qmp command 
> >>takes 
> >>a few minutes before returning, because he didn't apply 
> >>
> >>https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-05/msg02511.html 
> 
> Is this patch already apply on the block tree ?
> 
> With nfs as source storage, it's really slow currently (lseek slow + a lot of 
> nfs ops).

The patch is waiting for the next PULL in Jeff Cody's tree I think.

Fam

> 
> 
> 
> ----- Mail original -----
> De: "Fam Zheng" <address@hidden>
> À: "pbonzini" <address@hidden>
> Cc: "Kevin Wolf" <address@hidden>, address@hidden, "Jeff Cody" 
> <address@hidden>, "qemu-devel" <address@hidden>, "qemu-stable" 
> <address@hidden>, "stefanha" <address@hidden>, address@hidden, address@hidden
> Envoyé: Jeudi 25 Juin 2015 12:45:38
> Objet: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-stable] [PATCH v7 0/8] block: Mirror discarded 
> sectors
> 
> On Thu, 06/25 09:02, Fam Zheng wrote: 
> > On Wed, 06/24 19:01, Paolo Bonzini wrote: 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 24/06/2015 11:08, Fam Zheng wrote: 
> > > >> Stefan, 
> > > >> 
> > > >> The only controversial patches are the qmp/drive-mirror ones (1-3), 
> > > >> while 
> > > >> patches 4-8 are still useful on their own: they fix the mentioned 
> > > >> crash and 
> > > >> improve iotests. 
> > > >> 
> > > >> Shall we merge the second half (of course none of them depend on 1-3) 
> > > >> now that 
> > > >> softfreeze is approaching? 
> > > > 
> > > > Stefan, would you consider applying patches 4-8? 
> > > 
> > > Actually why not apply all of them? Even if blockdev-mirror is a 
> > > superior interface in the long run, the current behavior of drive-mirror 
> > > can cause images to balloon up to the full size, which is bad. 
> > > Extending drive-mirror is okay IMHO for 2.4. 
> > > 
> > 
> > Before we do that, Andrey Korolyov has reported a hang issue with 
> > unmap=true, 
> > I'll take a look at it today. 
> 
> There is no problem, the observasion by Andrey was just that qmp command 
> takes 
> a few minutes before returning, because he didn't apply 
> 
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-05/msg02511.html 
> 
> Fam 
>