Am Tuesday 12 May 2009 15:54:14 schrieb Rusty Russell: > On Mon, 11 May 2009 06:09:08 pm Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Do we need a new feature flag for this command or can we expect that > > all previous barrier support was buggy enough anyway? > > You mean reuse the VIRTIO_BLK_F_BARRIER for this as well? Seems fine. > > AFAIK only lguest offered that, and lguest has no ABI. Best would be to > implement VIRTIO_BLK_T_FLUSH as well; it's supposed to be demo code, and it > should be easy). It is also used by kuli (http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/linux390/kuli.html) and kuli used fdatasync. Since kuli is on offical webpages it takes a while to update that code. When you reuse the VIRTIO_BLK_F_BARRIER flag, that would trigger some VIRTIO_BLK_T_FLUSH commands sent to the kuli host, right? I think the if/else logic of kuli would interpret that as a read request....I am voting for a new feature flag :-) Christian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
