Re: [RFC 0/3] 64bit block-layer part I

2020-04-23 Thread Kevin Wolf
Am 30.03.2020 um 16:18 hat Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy geschrieben: > Hi all! > > There is an idea to make NBD protocol extension to support 64bit > write-zero/discard/block-status commands (commands, which doesn't > transfer user data). It's needed to increase performance of zeroing > large

Re: [RFC 0/3] 64bit block-layer part I

2020-04-22 Thread Eric Blake
On 4/22/20 1:24 PM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: So, I think the simplest way is to add .bdrv_co_pwritev_zeros64 and .bdrv_co_pdiscard64 and update drivers one-by-one. If at some point all drivers updated - drop unused 32bit functions, and then drop "64" suffix from API. If not - we'll

Re: [RFC 0/3] 64bit block-layer part I

2020-04-22 Thread Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
30.03.2020 17:18, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: Hi all! There is an idea to make NBD protocol extension to support 64bit write-zero/discard/block-status commands (commands, which doesn't transfer user data). It's needed to increase performance of zeroing large ranges (up to the whole

Re: [RFC 0/3] 64bit block-layer part I

2020-04-22 Thread Stefan Hajnoczi
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 05:18:15PM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > Hi all! > > There is an idea to make NBD protocol extension to support 64bit > write-zero/discard/block-status commands (commands, which doesn't > transfer user data). It's needed to increase performance of zeroing >

Re: [RFC 0/3] 64bit block-layer part I

2020-04-22 Thread Eric Blake
On 4/22/20 9:29 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: Any thoughts here? I need to resend to update some more functions as patchew said. Is it OK in general? Or should we instead convert everything to uint64_t ? I definitely prefer int64_t as our base (off_t is signed as well, making 63

Re: [RFC 0/3] 64bit block-layer part I

2020-04-22 Thread Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
Any thoughts here? I need to resend to update some more functions as patchew said. Is it OK in general? Or should we instead convert everything to uint64_t ? 30.03.2020 17:18, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: Hi all! There is an idea to make NBD protocol extension to support 64bit

Re: [RFC 0/3] 64bit block-layer part I

2020-03-30 Thread no-reply
Patchew URL: https://patchew.org/QEMU/20200330141818.31294-1-vsement...@virtuozzo.com/ Hi, This series failed the docker-mingw@fedora build test. Please find the testing commands and their output below. If you have Docker installed, you can probably reproduce it locally. === TEST SCRIPT

Re: [RFC 0/3] 64bit block-layer part I

2020-03-30 Thread no-reply
Patchew URL: https://patchew.org/QEMU/20200330141818.31294-1-vsement...@virtuozzo.com/ Hi, This series failed the docker-quick@centos7 build test. Please find the testing commands and their output below. If you have Docker installed, you can probably reproduce it locally. === TEST SCRIPT

Re: [RFC 0/3] 64bit block-layer part I

2020-03-30 Thread no-reply
Patchew URL: https://patchew.org/QEMU/20200330141818.31294-1-vsement...@virtuozzo.com/ Hi, This series failed the asan build test. Please find the testing commands and their output below. If you have Docker installed, you can probably reproduce it locally. === TEST SCRIPT BEGIN ===

[RFC 0/3] 64bit block-layer part I

2020-03-30 Thread Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
Hi all! There is an idea to make NBD protocol extension to support 64bit write-zero/discard/block-status commands (commands, which doesn't transfer user data). It's needed to increase performance of zeroing large ranges (up to the whole image). Zeroing of the whole image is used as first step of