[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH v2 15/17] block: Switch discard length bounds to
From: |
Eric Blake |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH v2 15/17] block: Switch discard length bounds to byte-based |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:21:25 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 |
On 06/21/2016 08:05 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 14.06.2016 um 23:30 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
>> Sector-based limits are awkward to think about; in our on-going
>> quest to move to byte-based interfaces, convert max_discard and
>> discard_alignment. Rename them, using 'pdiscard' as an aid to
>> track which remaining discard interfaces need conversion, and so
>> that the compiler will help us catch the change in semantics
>> across any rebased code. In iscsi.c, sector_limits_lun2qemu()
>> is no longer needed; and the BlockLimits type is now completely
>> byte-based.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
>
>> /* maximum number of bytes that can zeroized at once (since it is
>> - * signed, it must be < 2G, if set) */
>> + * signed, it must be < 2G, if set), should be multiple of
>> + * pwrite_zeroes_alignment. May be 0 if no inherent 32-bit limit */
>> int32_t max_pwrite_zeroes;
>>
>> /* optimal alignment for write zeroes requests in bytes, must be
>> - * power of 2, and less than max_pwrite_zeroes if that is set */
>> + * power of 2, less than max_pwrite_zeroes if that is set, and
>> + * multiple of bs->request_alignment. May be 0 if
>> + * bs->request_alignment is good enough */
>> uint32_t pwrite_zeroes_alignment;
>
> I think you intended to have these as part of some earlier patch, they
> are not related to discard.
Well, the patch they should have been in is already part of master
(cf081fca), so I'll just split out the changes to a trivial prereq patch.
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature