Re: [PATCH 17/18] block: Reorganize some declarations in block-backend-io.h

[Hanna Reitz <hreitz@redhat.com>]

On 17.05.22 13:39, Alberto Faria wrote:
> Keep generated_co_wrapper and coroutine_fn pairs together. This should
> make it clear that each I/O function has these two versions.
>
> Also move blk_co_{pread,pwrite}()'s implementations out of the header
> file for consistency.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alberto Faria <afaria@redhat.com>
> ---
>   block/block-backend.c             | 22 ++++++++
>   include/sysemu/block-backend-io.h | 87 +++++++++++++------------------
>   2 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)

[...]

> diff --git a/include/sysemu/block-backend-io.h b/include/sysemu/block-backend-io.h
> index 004493ec36..30ed979fb1 100644
> --- a/include/sysemu/block-backend-io.h
> +++ b/include/sysemu/block-backend-io.h
> @@ -88,11 +88,6 @@ uint32_t blk_get_request_alignment(BlockBackend *blk);
>   uint32_t blk_get_max_transfer(BlockBackend *blk);
>   uint64_t blk_get_max_hw_transfer(BlockBackend *blk);
>   
> -int coroutine_fn blk_co_copy_range(BlockBackend *blk_in, int64_t off_in,
> -                                   BlockBackend *blk_out, int64_t off_out,
> -                                   int64_t bytes, BdrvRequestFlags read_flags,
> -                                   BdrvRequestFlags write_flags);
> -
>   
>   /*
>    * "I/O or GS" API functions. These functions can run without

[...]

> @@ -190,4 +172,9 @@ int coroutine_fn blk_co_truncate(BlockBackend *blk, int64_t offset, bool exact,
>                                    PreallocMode prealloc, BdrvRequestFlags flags,
>                                    Error **errp);
>   
> +int coroutine_fn blk_co_copy_range(BlockBackend *blk_in, int64_t off_in,
> +                                   BlockBackend *blk_out, int64_t off_out,
> +                                   int64_t bytes, BdrvRequestFlags read_flags,
> +                                   BdrvRequestFlags write_flags);
> +
>   #endif /* BLOCK_BACKEND_IO_H */

This moves blk_co_copy_range() from the “I/O API functions” section of 
this header into the “"I/O or GS" API functions” section.  Is that intended?

The rest looks good to me, but I wonder about this one function.

Hanna