On 12/07/2022 20.34, John Snow wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 11:35 AM John Snow wrote:
Note: patches 10-12 are included for testing simplicity, they shouldn't
be merged. They will be included in a forthcoming block PR.
Patches 1-9 are fully reviewed. Whose tree should this go in?
I can tak
On 08/07/2022 17.34, John Snow wrote:
Note: patches 10-12 are included for testing simplicity, they shouldn't
be merged. They will be included in a forthcoming block PR.
V4:
- Addressed concern by Marc-Andre in patch 01.
- Squashed Ubuntu patches (rth)
This patch series attempts to improve the
Am 15/07/2022 um 16:34 schrieb Hanna Reitz:
> On 12.07.22 23:19, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
>> Together with all _can_set_ and _set_ APIs, as they are not needed
>> anymore.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito
>> ---
>> block.c | 196 -
Am 14/07/2022 um 18:45 schrieb Hanna Reitz:
> On 12.07.22 23:19, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
>> -
>> RFC because I am not sure about the AioContext locks.
>> - Do we need to take the new AioContext lock? what does it protect?
>> - Taking the old AioContext lock is required now, bec
Am 14/07/2022 um 18:45 schrieb Hanna Reitz:
>> + * First, go recursively through all nodes in the graph, and see if they
>> + * can change their AioContext.
>> + * If so, add for each node a new transaction with a callback to
>> change the
>> + * AioContext with the new one.
>> + * Once recursio
On 14.07.2022 15:28, Hanna Reitz wrote:
Commit a4072543ccdddbd241d5962d9237b8b41fd006bf has changed the I/O here
from working on a local one-element I/O vector to just using the buffer
directly (using the bdrv_co_pread()/bdrv_co_pwrite() helper functions
introduced shortly before).
However, it o
On 14.07.2022 15:28, Hanna Reitz wrote:
Test an allocating write to a parallels image that has a backing node.
Before HEAD^, doing so used to give me a failed assertion (when the
backing node contains only `42` bytes; the results varies with the value
chosen, for `0` bytes, for example, all I get
Hao Wu writes:
> This type is used to represent block devs that are not suitable to
> be represented by other existing types.
>
> A sample use is to represent an at24c eeprom device defined in
> hw/nvram/eeprom_at24c.c. The block device can be used to contain the
> content of the said eeprom devi
Hao Wu writes:
> This patch allows the user to attach an external drive as a property
> for an onboard at24c eeprom device.
What's the contents of the EEPROM before the patch?
I guess the patch lets users replace that contents. Why would a user
want to do that?
>
On 18/07/2022 11.49, Markus Armbruster wrote:
[...]
An OTP device isn't really a parallel flash, and neither are eFuses.
More fast-and-lose use of IF_PFLASH may exist in the tree, and maybe of
other interface types, too.
This patch introduces IF_OTHER. The patch after next uses it for an
EEPROM
Sam Li writes:
> Markus Armbruster 于2022年7月12日周二 13:47写道：
>>
>> Sam Li writes:
>>
>> > This patch series adds support for zoned device to virtio-blk emulation.
>> > Zoned
>> > Storage can support sequential writes, which reduces write amplification
>> > in SSD,
>> > leading to higher write th
On 7/14/22 16:28, Hanna Reitz wrote:
Commit a4072543ccdddbd241d5962d9237b8b41fd006bf has changed the I/O here
from working on a local one-element I/O vector to just using the buffer
directly (using the bdrv_co_pread()/bdrv_co_pwrite() helper functions
introduced shortly before).
However, it only
On 7/1/22 11:41, Hanna Reitz wrote:
On 13.04.22 14:26, Raphael Pour wrote:
>> }
- return ret;
+ /*
+ * Remove all keys from the generic layer which
+ * can't be converted by rbd
+ * >
Does any other driver do this? Shouldn’t we leave them there so that
the generic laye
On 7/14/22 16:28, Hanna Reitz wrote:
Test an allocating write to a parallels image that has a backing node.
Before HEAD^, doing so used to give me a failed assertion (when the
backing node contains only `42` bytes; the results varies with the value
chosen, for `0` bytes, for example, all I get is
On 11.07.2022 13:07, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
Commit 5f76a7aac156ca75680dad5df4a385fd0b58f6b1 is looking harmless from
the first glance, but it has changed things a lot. 'libvirt' uses it to
detect that it should follow new initialization way and this changes
things considerably. With this procedure
Am 18/07/2022 um 10:45 schrieb Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito:
>
>
> Am 15/07/2022 um 16:34 schrieb Hanna Reitz:
>> On 12.07.22 23:19, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
>>> Together with all _can_set_ and _set_ APIs, as they are not needed
>>> anymore.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Espo
On 7/14/22 17:13, Hanna Reitz wrote:
that we want to run before the others but still only when invoking
finalize/commit/abort.
I don’t understand this yet (but perhaps it’ll become clearer with the
following patches); doesn’t the new function do the opposite? I.e.,
basically add some clean-up
On 03/02/2021 17.02, Michael Roth wrote:
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 04:47:08PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 03.02.2021 um 13:45 hat BALATON Zoltan geschrieben:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2021, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 09:58:15PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
Follow the inclusiv
On 7/12/22 23:19, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
+/* No need to ignore `child`, because it has been detached already */
ignore = NULL;
-child->klass->set_aio_ctx(child, s->old_parent_ctx, &ignore);
+ret = child->klass->change_aio_ctx(child, s->old_parent_ctx,
On 7/12/22 23:19, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
diff --git a/block/block-backend.c b/block/block-backend.c
index 674eaaa2bf..6e90ac3a6a 100644
--- a/block/block-backend.c
+++ b/block/block-backend.c
@@ -2184,8 +2184,12 @@ static int blk_do_set_aio_context(BlockBackend *blk,
AioContext *new_c
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 4:17 AM Thomas Huth wrote:
>
> On 08/07/2022 17.34, John Snow wrote:
> > Note: patches 10-12 are included for testing simplicity, they shouldn't
> > be merged. They will be included in a forthcoming block PR.
> >
> > V4:
> >
> > - Addressed concern by Marc-Andre in patch 01
21 matches
Mail list logo
