Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 49/55] block: Declare qemu_blockalign() in block.h, not block_int.h
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 10:56:07AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > > Hmm. We already do proper read-modify-write cycles for actual data > > transfers, so killing the buffer inside SD sounds like the better > > idea. qemu_blockalign really should be used only for block-layer internal > > allocations. > > What about the uses in scsi-disk.c and ide/core.c? They are allocating internal bounce buffers due to suboptimal I/O models. But given that this is the reality in multiple qemu drivers I think I'll give up and ack the move.
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 49/55] block: Declare qemu_blockalign() in block.h, not block_int.h
Christoph Hellwig writes: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 06:24:23PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Device models should be able to use it without an unclean include of >> block_int.h. > > Hmm. We already do proper read-modify-write cycles for actual data > transfers, so killing the buffer inside SD sounds like the better > idea. qemu_blockalign really should be used only for block-layer internal > allocations. What about the uses in scsi-disk.c and ide/core.c?
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 49/55] block: Declare qemu_blockalign() in block.h, not block_int.h
Christoph Hellwig writes: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 06:24:23PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Device models should be able to use it without an unclean include of >> block_int.h. > > Hmm. We already do proper read-modify-write cycles for actual data > transfers, so killing the buffer inside SD sounds like the better > idea. qemu_blockalign really should be used only for block-layer internal > allocations. Ok, dropping the patch.
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 49/55] block: Declare qemu_blockalign() in block.h, not block_int.h
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 06:24:23PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Device models should be able to use it without an unclean include of > block_int.h. Hmm. We already do proper read-modify-write cycles for actual data transfers, so killing the buffer inside SD sounds like the better idea. qemu_blockalign really should be used only for block-layer internal allocations.
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 49/55] block: Declare qemu_blockalign() in block.h, not block_int.h
Device models should be able to use it without an unclean include of block_int.h. Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster --- block.h |2 ++ block_int.h |2 -- hw/sd.c |1 - 3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/block.h b/block.h index b6eaaba..8f52abb 100644 --- a/block.h +++ b/block.h @@ -264,6 +264,8 @@ int bdrv_img_create(const char *filename, const char *fmt, const char *base_filename, const char *base_fmt, char *options, uint64_t img_size, int flags); +void *qemu_blockalign(BlockDriverState *bs, size_t size); + #define BDRV_SECTORS_PER_DIRTY_CHUNK 2048 void bdrv_set_dirty_tracking(BlockDriverState *bs, int enable); diff --git a/block_int.h b/block_int.h index 7e74d01..768c842 100644 --- a/block_int.h +++ b/block_int.h @@ -213,8 +213,6 @@ void *qemu_aio_get(AIOPool *pool, BlockDriverState *bs, BlockDriverCompletionFunc *cb, void *opaque); void qemu_aio_release(void *p); -void *qemu_blockalign(BlockDriverState *bs, size_t size); - #ifdef _WIN32 int is_windows_drive(const char *filename); #endif diff --git a/hw/sd.c b/hw/sd.c index 4dc9047..fdd87b0 100644 --- a/hw/sd.c +++ b/hw/sd.c @@ -31,7 +31,6 @@ #include "hw.h" #include "block.h" -#include "block_int.h" #include "sd.h" //#define DEBUG_SD 1 -- 1.7.2.3
