From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53397)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1XKmR2-0002RN-Ay
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 06:51:14 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1XKmQw-0003sn-6C
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 06:51:08 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:5288)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <famz@redhat.com>) id 1XKmQv-0003sc-VX
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 06:51:02 -0400
Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s7MAp18t018049
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256
	verify=OK)
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 06:51:01 -0400
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 18:51:16 +0800
From: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20140822105116.GA704@T430.nay.redhat.com>
References: <1408622216-9578-1-git-send-email-famz@redhat.com>
	<1408622216-9578-2-git-send-email-famz@redhat.com>
	<53F5E289.8050703@redhat.com>
	<20140822012336.GB3410@T430.redhat.com>
	<53F6FBFF.1010504@redhat.com>
	<20140822093758.GA24795@T430.nay.redhat.com>
	<53F7171B.5050702@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53F7171B.5050702@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/9] block: Add bdrv_aio_cancel_async
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

On Fri, 08/22 12:10, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 22/08/2014 11:37, Fam Zheng ha scritto:
> > Exactly. I'd rather not change the contract then.
> > 
> > Alternatively, we may add a refcnt field to BlockDriverAioCB and grab one before
> > calling .cancel, so the qemu_aio_release will not free it.
> 
> Yes, and I don't exclude that sooner or later we'll have to add
> reference counts to AIOCB anyway.  However, reference counting is not
> _that_ cheap so for now I'd rather see other solutions explored.

Why doesn it have an performance effect? Just because of the would-be
"if (likely(--acb->refcnt == 0))" testing?

> 
> The problem is implementing cancel_sync in terms of cancel.  The
> simplest solution, for now, is to make bdrv_aio_cancel_async return
> false if the callback is not implemented, and fall back to synchronous
> cancellation.

This does keep the code change local, but not necessarily simple, since there
would be two cancelling code paths in scsi-bus. I already find the scsi req
ref/unref pairs a bit hard to track.

I prefer that we change the implementation to avoid complicating interface:
don't call qemu_aio_release in .cancel, but call it in
bdrv_aio_cancel{,_async} after calling .cancel(). Does that work?

Fam