Am 10.01.2013 um 13:15 schrieb Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>: > Il 10/01/2013 13:12, Peter Lieven ha scritto: >>>> >>>> But perhaps we do not need to start a slice at all when iolimits are >>>> set. That is, do >>>> >>>> bs->slice_start = bs->slice_end = bs->slice_time = 0; >>>> >>>> or perhaps even nothing at all since bdrv_io_limits_disable should have >>>> written those exact values. >> Or it was set when the BlockDriverState was initialized. >> >> I am not familiar enough with the io limits code to decide if not starting a >> slice >> is also correct. > > I haven't tested it, but if it works, I think it is better. > > Think of it this way: it doesn't matter whether the first I/O operation > comes immediately after limits are set, or 10 seconds later. In the > latter case, bdrv_exceed_io_limits will _already_ start a new slice. It > is better to be consistent and always delay the start of the slice. >
seems to be working as well. are you happy with: block: fix initialization in bdrv_io_limits_enable() Peter
