Am 22.05.2012 18:17, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]>
> ---
> block.c | 5 +++++
> block.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block.c b/block.c
> index b682764..bb709c2 100644
> --- a/block.c
> +++ b/block.c
> @@ -2369,6 +2369,11 @@ int bdrv_enable_write_cache(BlockDriverState *bs)
> return bs->enable_write_cache;
> }
>
> +void bdrv_set_enable_write_cache(BlockDriverState *bs, bool wce)
> +{
> + bs->enable_write_cache = wce;
> +}
I think we should have a flush here if bs->enable_write_cache && !wce,
it's not really something that could differ between device models. I see
that you're doing it in your IDE patch by calling ide_flush_cache()
which looks like this:
void ide_flush_cache(IDEState *s)
{
if (s->bs == NULL) {
ide_flush_cb(s, 0);
return;
}
bdrv_acct_start(s->bs, &s->acct, 0, BDRV_ACCT_FLUSH);
bdrv_aio_flush(s->bs, ide_flush_cb, s);
}
I don't think this flush should be accounted, because it's only
indirectly initiated by the guest.
Kevin
