On 01/06/2017 17:59, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 31.05.2017 um 14:32 hat Stefan Hajnoczi geschrieben:
>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 10:21:51PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>> static void qed_clear_need_check(void *opaque, int ret)
>>> {
>>> BDRVQEDState *s = opaque;
>>>
>>> if (ret) {
>>> - qed_unplug_allocating_write_reqs(s);
>>> - return;
>>> + goto out;
>>> }
>>>
>>> s->header.features &= ~QED_F_NEED_CHECK;
>>> - qed_write_header(s, qed_flush_after_clear_need_check, s);
>>> + ret = qed_write_header(s);
>>> + (void) ret;
>>> +
>>> + ret = bdrv_flush(s->bs);
>>> + (void) ret;
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + qed_unplug_allocating_write_reqs(s);
>>> }
>>
>> Should we unplug allocating write reqs before flushing? The async code
>> kicks off a flush but doesn't wait for it to complete.
>
> You're right that moving it up would match the old code. Not sure if it
> would make much of a difference, though, isn't the request queue drained
> in the kernel anyway while doing a flush?No, it isn't AFAIK. Paolo
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
