[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Drop VirtIOBlockReq.read
From: |
Stefan Hajnoczi |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Drop VirtIOBlockReq.read |
Date: |
Wed, 4 Jun 2014 11:28:41 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 03:37:29PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > QEMUIOVector *inhdr; /* iovecs for virtio_blk_inhdr */
>
> This can be unified with the "in" field; the status is only one byte, so
> using a full-blown QEMUIOVector is overkill. Stefan, what do you think?
I thought about this when initially writing the code, but it seemed like
a hack to assume virtio_blk_inhdr will always be 1 byte.
virtio-blk is unlikely to change much since the focus is on virtio-scsi
rather than piling on more virtio-blk feature.
I still prefer we treat it like a struct without making size
assumptions, but if the code turns out to be nicer then I don't mind.
Stefan
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/5] virtio-blk: Merge VirtIOBlockRequest into VirtIOBlockReq, (continued)
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/5] virtio-blk: Merge VirtIOBlockRequest into VirtIOBlockReq, Fam Zheng, 2014/06/03
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] virtio-blk: Drop bounce buffer from dataplane code, Fam Zheng, 2014/06/03
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Drop VirtIOBlockReq.read, Fam Zheng, 2014/06/03
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Drop VirtIOBlockReq.read, Paolo Bonzini, 2014/06/03
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Drop VirtIOBlockReq.read, Fam Zheng, 2014/06/04
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Drop VirtIOBlockReq.read, Fam Zheng, 2014/06/04
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Drop VirtIOBlockReq.read, Paolo Bonzini, 2014/06/04
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Drop VirtIOBlockReq.read, Fam Zheng, 2014/06/04
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Drop VirtIOBlockReq.read, Paolo Bonzini, 2014/06/04
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Drop VirtIOBlockReq.read,
Stefan Hajnoczi <=