[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC patch v1 2/3] qemu-file: add buffered mode
From: |
Daniel P . Berrangé |
Subject: |
Re: [RFC patch v1 2/3] qemu-file: add buffered mode |
Date: |
Mon, 4 May 2020 10:08:55 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.13.4 (2020-02-15) |
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 01:14:33PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Denis Plotnikov (address@hidden) wrote:
> > The patch adds ability to qemu-file to write the data
> > asynchronously to improve the performance on writing.
> > Before, only synchronous writing was supported.
> >
> > Enabling of the asyncronous mode is managed by new
> > "enabled_buffered" callback.
>
> It's a bit invasive isn't it - changes a lot of functions in a lot of
> places!
> The multifd code separated the control headers from the data on separate
> fd's - but that doesn't help your case.
>
> Is there any chance you could do this by using the existing 'save_page'
> hook (that RDMA uses).
>
> In the cover letter you mention direct qemu_fflush calls - have we got a
> few too many in some palces that you think we can clean out?
When I first introduced the QIOChannel framework, I hoped that we could
largely eliminate QEMUFile as a concept. Thus I'm a bit suspicious of
the idea of introducing more functionality to QEMUFile, especially as the
notion of buffering I/O is rather generic. Is there scope for having a
QIOChannelBuffered object for doing buffering. Would that provide better
isolation from the migration code and thus be less invasive/complex to
maintain ?
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: [RFC patch v1 2/3] qemu-file: add buffered mode,
Daniel P . Berrangé <=