On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 12:36:37PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 11/03/2013 06:09, Asias He ha scritto: > > This patch makes vhost_scsi_flush() wait for all the pending requests > > issued before the flush operation to be finished. > > There is no protection against issuing concurrent flush operations. If > we later would like to make the flush a ioctl (for example for migration > purposes), it would be confusing, and I'm not sure how you could extend > the during_flush machinery. vhost_scsi_flush() is called under the vs->dev.mutex lock. > What about making vhost_scsi_flush() wait for all pending requests, > including those issues during the flush operation? This will take unbonded time if guest keep sending requests. > Then you can easily > support concurrent flushes; just add a waitqueue and wake_up_all at the > end of the flush operation. I am not sure why we want concurrent flushes. The flush thing is already getting complex. > BTW, adding such a ioctl as part of this patch would probably be a good > thing to do anyway. > > Paolo -- Asias -- 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
