WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] blkfront problem in pvops kernel when barriers enabled

To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] blkfront problem in pvops kernel when barriers enabled
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 10:34:49 -0700
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Marek Marczykowski <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 10:35:35 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20110907014741.GD30639@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4E6357C6.6050101@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110906163213.GC5264@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E665572.7080009@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110907014741.GD30639@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110816 Thunderbird/6.0
On 09/06/2011 06:47 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> (on 3.1rc2) Looking to xenstore now there is 'feature-flush-cache=1' and
> no 'feature-barrier'. So it is ok.
> <scratches head>
>
> I can only think of 2.6.38-3 XenOLinux doing it - and it is a bug
> to do it. It really ought to _not_ advertise 'feature-barrier' and
> instead advertise 'feature-flush-cache'.

Does that mean that older guests which don't understand flush-cache will
be left with no way to force writes to stable storage?  Seems to me that
even if the backend would prefer flush-cache, it should also advertise
barriers.

However, that raises the question of how to express the preferred
mechanism if multiple are available.  You could assume that flush-cache
is always preferred if available, but that's pretty clunky.

    J

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel