On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 04:18:36PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > 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 :-) Ok, next version will have a new feature flag. I actually have some other bits I want to redesign so it might take a bit longer to get it out. -- 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
