This patch updates docs/qcow2-cache.txt explaining how to use the new
l2-cache-entry-size parameter.
Here's a more detailed technical description of this feature:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2017-09/msg00635.html
And here are some performance numbers:
https://lists.gnu.o
On 02/19/2018 08:54 AM, Alberto Garcia wrote:
This patch updates docs/qcow2-cache.txt explaining how to use the new
l2-cache-entry-size parameter.
Here's a more detailed technical description of this feature:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2017-09/msg00635.html
And here are
On 18/02/2018 19:20, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> Paolo's patches have been getting us closer to multiqueue block layer
> support but there is a final set of changes required that has become
> clearer to me just recently. I'm curious if this matches Paolo's
> vision and whether anyone else has comment
On Mon 19 Feb 2018 05:44:23 PM CET, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/19/2018 08:54 AM, Alberto Garcia wrote:
>> This patch updates docs/qcow2-cache.txt explaining how to use the new
>> l2-cache-entry-size parameter.
>>
>> Here's a more detailed technical description of this feature:
>>
>> https://l
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 6:03 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 18/02/2018 19:20, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> Paolo's patches have been getting us closer to multiqueue block layer
>> support but there is a final set of changes required that has become
>> clearer to me just recently. I'm curious if this
By the way, one thing that makes me nervous is that we lack an
explicit "request queue" or "per-queue" concept. State can either be
per-BlockDriverState (shared state) or per-request, but not per-queue.
So far there hasn't been a need for per-queue state but there may be
opportunities to eliminat
>>Heh. I have stopped pushing my patches (and scratched a few itches with
>>patchew instead) because I'm still a bit burned out from recent KVM
>>stuff, but this may be the injection of enthusiasm that I needed. :)
Thanks Paolo for your great work on multiqueue, that's a lot of work since the
l
On 02/19/2018 12:26 PM, Alberto Garcia wrote:
+ - The L2 cache entry size has the same restrictions as the cluster
+ size (power of two, at least 512 bytes).
Worth mentioning the upper limit of the cluster size?
I thought it would be unnecessary since the that's already mentioned
several t
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 02:46:35PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/15/2018 07:51 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> >Simple way to have auto generated filenames with auto clenup. Like
>
> s/clenup/cleanup/
>
> >FilePath but without using 'with' statement and without additional
> >indentat
