On 20.09.19 15:26, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > 20.09.2019 16:10, Max Reitz wrote: >> On 20.09.19 14:53, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: >>> 20.09.2019 15:40, Max Reitz wrote: >>>> On 20.09.19 13:53, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: >>>>> 20.09.2019 14:10, Max Reitz wrote: >>>>>> On 16.09.19 19:53, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: >>>>>>> Hi all! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Here is an asynchronous scheme for handling fragmented qcow2 >>>>>>> reads and writes. Both qcow2 read and write functions loops through >>>>>>> sequential portions of data. The series aim it to parallelize these >>>>>>> loops iterations. >>>>>>> It improves performance for fragmented qcow2 images, I've tested it >>>>>>> as described below. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks again, applied to my block branch: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://git.xanclic.moe/XanClic/qemu/commits/branch/block >>>>> >>>>> Thanks a lot! >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> v5: fix 026 and rebase on Max's block branch [perf results not updated]: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 01: new, prepare 026 to not fail >>>>>>> 03: - drop read_encrypted blkdbg event [Kevin] >>>>>>> - assert((x & (BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE - 1)) == 0) -> >>>>>>> assert(QEMU_IS_ALIGNED(x, BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE)) [rebase] >>>>>>> - full host offset in argument of qcow2_co_decrypt [rebase] >>>>>>> 04: - substitute remaining qcow2_co_do_pwritev by qcow2_co_pwritev_task >>>>>>> in comment [Max] >>>>>>> - full host offset in argument of qcow2_co_encrypt [rebase] >>>>>>> 05: - Now patch don't affect 026 iotest, so its output is not changed >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rebase changes seems trivial, so, I've kept r-b marks. >>>>>> >>>>>> (For the record, I didn’t consider them trivial, or I’d’ve applied >>>>>> Maxim’s series on top of yours. I consider a conflict to be trivially >>>>>> resolvable only if there is only one way of doing it; but when I >>>>>> resolved the conflicts myself, I resolved the one in patch 3 differently >>>>>> from you – I added an offset_in_cluster variable to >>>>>> qcow2_co_preadv_encrypted(). Sure, it’s still simple and the difference >>>>>> is minor, but that was exactly where I thought that I can’t consider >>>>>> this trivial.) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hmm. May be it's trivial enough to keep r-b (as my change is trivial >>>>> itself), but not >>>>> trivial enough to change alien patch on queuing? If you disagree, I'll be >>>>> more >>>>> careful on keeping r-b in changed patches, sorry. >>>> >>>> It doesn’t matter much to me, I diff all patches anyway. :-) >>>> >>> >>> then a bit offtopic: >>> >>> Which tools are you use? >>> >>> I've some scripts to compare different versions of one serie (or to check, >>> what >>> was changed in patches during some porting process..).. The core thing is >>> to filter >>> some not interesting numbers and hashes, which makes diffs dirty, and then >>> call vimdiff. >>> But maybe I've reinvented the wheel. >> >> Just kompare as a graphical diff tool; I just scroll past the hash diffs. >> >> But now that you gave me the idea, maybe I should write a script to >> filter them... (So, no, I don’t know of a tool that would do that >> already :-/) >> > > > Then you may find my scripts somehow useful, at least as a hint (I'm afraid > code is not beautiful at all)
Thanks! :-) Max
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
