On 08.06.23 11:52, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 at 16:48, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
When processing vectored guest requests that are not aligned to the
storage request alignment, we pad them by adding head and/or tail
buffers for a read-modify-write cycle.
Hi; Coverity complains (CID 15
On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 at 16:48, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
>
> When processing vectored guest requests that are not aligned to the
> storage request alignment, we pad them by adding head and/or tail
> buffers for a read-modify-write cycle.
Hi; Coverity complains (CID 1512819) that the assert added
in thi
06.06.2023 11:45, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
On 06.06.23 10:00, Michael Tokarev wrote:
..
This seems to be over-complicated, both of them, no?
I would have preferred to have this discussion while the patch was still on-list for review (this specific version was for two months, counting from
the f
On 06.06.23 10:00, Michael Tokarev wrote:
05.06.2023 18:45, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
When processing vectored guest requests that are not aligned to the
storage request alignment, we pad them by adding head and/or tail
buffers for a read-modify-write cycle.
The guest can submit I/O vectors up to I
05.06.2023 18:45, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
When processing vectored guest requests that are not aligned to the
storage request alignment, we pad them by adding head and/or tail
buffers for a read-modify-write cycle.
The guest can submit I/O vectors up to IOV_MAX (1024) in length, but
with this padd
