qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 05/10] snapshot: create bdrv_all_find_snapshot h


From: Denis V. Lunev
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 05/10] snapshot: create bdrv_all_find_snapshot helper
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 12:49:28 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0

On 11/16/2015 12:31 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 05:25:30PM +0300, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
+int bdrv_all_find_snapshot(const char *name, bool read_only,
+                           BlockDriverState **first_bad_bs)
+{
+    QEMUSnapshotInfo sn;
+    int err = 0;
+    BlockDriverState *bs = NULL;
+
+    while (err == 0 && (bs = bdrv_next(bs))) {
+        AioContext *ctx = bdrv_get_aio_context(bs);
+
+        aio_context_acquire(ctx);
+        if (read_only || (bdrv_is_inserted(bs) && !bdrv_is_read_only(bs))) {
+            err = bdrv_snapshot_find(bs, &sn, name);
+        }
+        aio_context_release(ctx);
+    }
+
+    *first_bad_bs = bs;
+    return err;
+}
It's difficult to see how bdrv_all_find_snapshot(read_only=true) is
equivalent to what you replaced below:

@@ -1500,21 +1489,7 @@ void hmp_info_snapshots(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict)
      available_snapshots = g_new0(int, nb_sns);
      total = 0;
      for (i = 0; i < nb_sns; i++) {
-        sn = &sn_tab[i];
-        available = 1;
-        bs1 = NULL;
-
-        while ((bs1 = bdrv_next(bs1))) {
-            if (bdrv_can_snapshot(bs1) && bs1 != bs) {
-                ret = bdrv_snapshot_find(bs1, sn_info, sn->id_str);
-                if (ret < 0) {
-                    available = 0;
-                    break;
-                }
-            }
-        }
-
-        if (available) {
+        if (bdrv_all_find_snapshot(sn_tab[i].id_str, true, &bs1) == 0) {
The original loop skips drives that cannot snapshot and the vmstate
drive.  The new code tries to find a snapshot all devices.

To me it seems the semantics are changed.  Can you explain why this
change is safe?
yep. you are once again right... OK.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]