Eric Blake wrote:
>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?
Yes, that makes sense. I will make the changes in the next version.
Thanks.
>
>>
>> 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
