On 25/05/2016 11:13, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
> Great - as long as you're aware of this I'll wait for the next version
> of the patchset to come out, and then at least I can re-run the macio
> installation test to ensure that there are no further corruption issues
> with unaligned DMA accesses.
On 25/05/16 09:45, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 25/05/2016 00:59, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
>> I eventually traced the corruption down to this section of code in
>> dma_blk_cb() which was incorrectly truncating the unaligned iovecs:
>>
>> if (dbs->iov.size & ~BDRV_SECTOR_MASK) {
>>
On 25/05/2016 00:59, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
> I eventually traced the corruption down to this section of code in
> dma_blk_cb() which was incorrectly truncating the unaligned iovecs:
>
> if (dbs->iov.size & ~BDRV_SECTOR_MASK) {
> qemu_iovec_discard_back(>iov, dbs->iov.size &
>
On 23/05/16 20:36, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
> On 23/05/16 13:54, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>> scsi-block uses the block layer for reads and writes in order to avoid
>> allocating bounce buffers as big as the transferred data. We know how
>> to split a large transfer to multiple reads and writes,
On 23/05/16 13:54, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> scsi-block uses the block layer for reads and writes in order to avoid
> allocating bounce buffers as big as the transferred data. We know how
> to split a large transfer to multiple reads and writes, and thus we can
> use scsi-disk.c's existing code to
scsi-block uses the block layer for reads and writes in order to avoid
allocating bounce buffers as big as the transferred data. We know how
to split a large transfer to multiple reads and writes, and thus we can
use scsi-disk.c's existing code to do I/O in multiple chunks (for non-s/g
SCSI
