Am 02.08.2011 16:55, schrieb Frediano Ziglio: > 2011/8/2 Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com>: >> Am 02.08.2011 16:23, schrieb Avi Kivity: >>> On 07/26/2011 02:48 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote: >>>> Depends on Stefan's latest coroutine patches. This series makes qcow and >>>> qcow2 >>>> take advantage of the new coroutine infrastructure. Both formats used >>>> synchronous operations for accessing their metadata and blocked the guest >>>> CPU >>>> during that time. With coroutines, the I/O will happen asynchronously in >>>> the >>>> background and the CPU won't be blocked any more. >>>> >>> >>> Do you plan to convert qcow2 to a fully synchronous design? >>> >>> IMO that will make it more maintainable. Cancellation will need some >>> thought, though. >> >> After this patch series, all interesting paths are free of callbacks (I >> assume this is what you mean by synchronous?). The only thing I can see >> that is left is qcow2_aio_flush. What is required are some cleanups that >> eliminate things that still look like AIO code, and yes, that's >> something that I want to have. >> >> Frediano has posted some patches which I haven't fully reviewed yet, but >> the qcow1 RFC he posted was definitely a step in the right direction. >> > > Did I send patches for qcow2? > I just rebased them with your last updates, I'll send them again.
Yes, you did. I just haven't reviewed them yet. But assuming that you're basically doing the same as in qcow1, they are the right thing to do. Kevin
