On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 05:23:42PM +0800, Li Dongyang wrote:
>> Dear list,
>> this is the V3 of the trim support for xen-blkfront/blkback,
>> thanks for all your reviews.
>> and when I looked back at Owen's patch in Dec 2010,
>> http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2010-12/msg00299.html
>> this patch above also add the trim union to blkif_x86_{32|64}_request,
>> and take care of trim request in blkif_get_x86{32|64}_req(),
>> however, in the later versions, the part is just gone. I wonder if it is
>> needed here? Thanks.
>
> Are you referring to git commit 51de69523ffe1c17994dc2f260369f29dfdce71c
> xen: Union the blkif_request request specific fields
that's the patch merged, the link I gave above was the previous
version cooked up by
Owen, and the patch in the link has changes to struct
blkif_x86_{32|64}_request related stuffs,
but that;s gone in the merged version, so I'm not sure if the gone
part is needed here, Thanks
>
> Prepare for extending the block device ring to allow request
> specific fields, by moving the request specific fields for
> reads, writes and barrier requests to a union member.
> ?
>
>>
>> Changelog V3:
>> rebased on linus's tree
>> enum backend types in blkif instead of flags in the interface header
>> more reasonable names in xenstore
>> move trim requesting handling to a separate function
>> do not re-enable interrupts unconditionally when handling response
>> set info->feature-trim only when we have all info needed for request
>> queue
>> Changelog V2:
>> rebased on Jeremy's tree
>> fixes according to Jan Beulich's comments
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-devel mailing list
>> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home