On Jul 30 00:29, Minwoo Im wrote:
> Klaus,
>
Hi Minwoo,
Thanks for the reviews and welcome to the party! :)
> On 20-07-20 13:37:36, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> > From: Klaus Jensen <k.jen...@samsung.com>
> >
> > Remove the has_sg member from NvmeRequest since it's redundant.
> >
> > Also, make sure the request iov is destroyed at completion time.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Klaus Jensen <k.jen...@samsung.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Maxim Levitsky <mlevi...@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > hw/block/nvme.c | 11 ++++++-----
> > hw/block/nvme.h | 1 -
> > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/block/nvme.c b/hw/block/nvme.c
> > index cb236d1c8c46..6a1a1626b87b 100644
> > --- a/hw/block/nvme.c
> > +++ b/hw/block/nvme.c
> > @@ -548,16 +548,20 @@ static void nvme_rw_cb(void *opaque, int ret)
> > block_acct_failed(blk_get_stats(n->conf.blk), &req->acct);
> > req->status = NVME_INTERNAL_DEV_ERROR;
> > }
> > - if (req->has_sg) {
> > +
> > + if (req->qsg.nalloc) {
>
> Personally, I prefer has_xxx or is_xxx to check whether the request is
> based on sg or iov as an inline function, but 'nalloc' is also fine to
> figure out the meaning of purpose here.
>
What I really want to do is get rid of this duality with qsg and iovs at
some point. I kinda wanna get rid of the dma helpers and the qsg
entirely and do the DMA handling directly.
Maybe an `int flags` member in NvmeRequest would be better for this,
such as NVME_REQ_DMA etc.
> > qemu_sglist_destroy(&req->qsg);
> > }
> > + if (req->iov.nalloc) {
> > + qemu_iovec_destroy(&req->iov);
> > + }
> > +
>
> Maybe this can be in a separated commit?
>
Yeah. I guess whenever a commit message includes "Also, ..." you really
should factor the change out ;)
I'll split it.
> Otherwise, It looks good to me.
>
> Thanks,
>
Does that mean I can add your R-b? :)
