Re: [PATCH V3 0/3] xen-blkfront/xen-blkback trim support

[Li Dongyang <lidongyang@novell.com>]

On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 05:23:42PM +0800, Li Dongyang wrote:
>> Dear list,
>> this is the V3 of the trim support for xen-blkfront/blkback,
>> thanks for all your reviews.
>> and when I looked back at Owen's patch in Dec 2010,
>> http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2010-12/msg00299.html
>> this patch above also add the trim union to blkif_x86_{32|64}_request,
>> and take care of trim request in blkif_get_x86{32|64}_req(),
>> however, in the later versions, the part is just gone. I wonder if it is
>> needed here? Thanks.
>
> Are you referring to git commit 51de69523ffe1c17994dc2f260369f29dfdce71c
> xen: Union the blkif_request request specific fields
that's the patch merged, the link I gave above was the previous
version cooked up by
Owen, and the patch in the link has changes to struct
blkif_x86_{32|64}_request related stuffs,
but that;s gone in the merged version, so I'm not sure if the gone
part is needed here, Thanks
>
>    Prepare for extending the block device ring to allow request
>    specific fields, by moving the request specific fields for
>    reads, writes and barrier requests to a union member.
> ?
>
>>
>> Changelog V3:
>>     rebased on linus's tree
>>     enum backend types in blkif instead of flags in the interface header
>>     more reasonable names in xenstore
>>     move trim requesting handling to a separate function
>>     do not re-enable interrupts unconditionally when handling response
>>     set info->feature-trim only when we have all info needed for request queue
>> Changelog V2:
>>     rebased on Jeremy's tree
>>     fixes according to Jan Beulich's comments
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-devel mailing list
>> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>