On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 12:19:14AM +0800, Sunny Zhu wrote:
> Keep it consistent with *bdrv_co_pdiscard.
>
> Currently, there is no BlockDriver implemented the bdrv_aio_pdiscard()
> function,
> so we don’t need to make any adaptations either.
If there are no drivers implementing the callback, then why have it?
I think we have been moving towards more coroutine-based callbacks and
away from the aio callbacks; if so, should we instead be deleting this
callback as stale code?
>
> Signed-off-by: Sunny Zhu <sunnyz...@qq.com>
> ---
> include/block/block_int-common.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/block/block_int-common.h
> b/include/block/block_int-common.h
> index ebb4e56a50..4bf422d733 100644
> --- a/include/block/block_int-common.h
> +++ b/include/block/block_int-common.h
> @@ -507,7 +507,7 @@ struct BlockDriver {
> BlockDriverState *bs, BlockCompletionFunc *cb, void *opaque);
>
> BlockAIOCB * GRAPH_RDLOCK_PTR (*bdrv_aio_pdiscard)(
> - BlockDriverState *bs, int64_t offset, int bytes,
> + BlockDriverState *bs, int64_t offset, int64_t bytes,
> BlockCompletionFunc *cb, void *opaque);
>
> int coroutine_fn GRAPH_RDLOCK_PTR (*bdrv_co_readv)(BlockDriverState *bs,
> --
> 2.43.0
>
>
--
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
Virtualization: qemu.org | libguestfs.org
