On 10/24/2016 05:36 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 24/10/2016 03:44, Changlong Xie wrote:
Ping. Any comments? It's really a problem for NBD.
Sorry, I haven't been sending pull requests. I'll do it this week.
Thanks : )
Paolo
Thanks
-Xie
On 10/12/2016 06:18 PM, Changlong Xie wrote:
On 24/10/2016 03:44, Changlong Xie wrote:
> Ping. Any comments? It's really a problem for NBD.
Sorry, I haven't been sending pull requests. I'll do it this week.
Paolo
> Thanks
> -Xie
>
> On 10/12/2016 06:18 PM, Changlong Xie wrote:
>> NBD is using the CoMutex in a way that wasn't antici
Ping. Any comments? It's really a problem for NBD.
Thanks
-Xie
On 10/12/2016 06:18 PM, Changlong Xie wrote:
NBD is using the CoMutex in a way that wasn't anticipated. For example, if
there are
N(N=26, MAX_NBD_REQUESTS=16) nbd write requests, so we will invoke
nbd_client_co_pwritev
N t
On 12/10/2016 12:18, Changlong Xie wrote:
> +if (s->in_flight == MAX_NBD_REQUESTS) {
> +qemu_co_queue_wait(&s->free_sema);
> assert(s->in_flight < MAX_NBD_REQUESTS);
> }
I was wondering if this should be a while loop instead, but the
assertion protects against that. So
On 10/12/2016 06:18 PM, Changlong Xie wrote:
time request Actions
29 15(most case) in_flight=15, Coroutine=C15, free_sema->holder=C17,
mutex->locked=false
NBD is using the CoMutex in a way that wasn't anticipated. For example, if
there are
N(N=26, MAX_NBD_REQUESTS=16) nbd write requests, so we will invoke
nbd_client_co_pwritev
N times.
time request Actions
1
