qemu-ppc
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v6 25/33] block_int-common.h: split function pointers in Bdrv


From: Hanna Reitz
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 25/33] block_int-common.h: split function pointers in BdrvChildClass
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 13:42:24 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.4.0

On 21.01.22 18:05, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
---
  include/block/block_int-common.h | 67 +++++++++++++++++++-------------
  1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/block/block_int-common.h b/include/block/block_int-common.h
index e007dbf768..cc8c8835ba 100644
--- a/include/block/block_int-common.h
+++ b/include/block/block_int-common.h
@@ -815,12 +815,16 @@ struct BdrvChildClass {
       */
      bool parent_is_bds;
+ /*
+     * Global state (GS) API. These functions run under the BQL lock.
+     *
+     * See include/block/block-global-state.h for more information about
+     * the GS API.
+     */
      void (*inherit_options)(BdrvChildRole role, bool parent_is_format,
                              int *child_flags, QDict *child_options,
                              int parent_flags, QDict *parent_options);
-
      void (*change_media)(BdrvChild *child, bool load);
-    void (*resize)(BdrvChild *child);
/*
       * Returns a name that is supposedly more useful for human users than the

The method this comment belongs to is `.get_name()`.  It’s exposed through `bdrv_get_parent_name()`, which is called by `bdrv_get_device_name()` and `bdrv_get_device_or_node_name()` – so I think it should be classified as I/O.

@@ -837,6 +841,40 @@ struct BdrvChildClass {
       */
      char *(*get_parent_desc)(BdrvChild *child);

This function is very similar, so we might also want to reconsider classifying it as I/O.  There’s no need, because all of its callers do run in the main thread, but at the same time I don’t believe there’s anything stopping us (and it starts to sound to me like all functions of the “get name” kind perhaps should ideally be I/O, in that they shouldn’t require the GS context).

Up to you. O:)

(Rest of this patch looks good!)

Hanna




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]