[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] libxl: prefer qdisk over blktap when choosing disk backend
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 05:04:07PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On 28/08/13 15:41, Wei Liu wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 02:35:56PM +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 03:16:23PM +0200, Fabio Fantoni wrote: > >>> Il 28/08/2013 15:04, Ian Jackson ha scritto: > >>>> Fabio Fantoni writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] libxl: prefer qdisk over > >>>> blktap when choosing disk backend"): > >>>>> I think is good prefer qdisk also for significant performance increase > >>>>> in comparison with blktap2. > >>>> Thanks, that's useful information. That, and what George said, have > >>>> convinced me this is the right change. > >>>> > >>>> Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> What about qemu traditional with this patch? > >>> I haven't tested qdisk with qemu traditional but unfortunately > >>> qemu-trad. is still widely used and therefore you have to be sure > >>> that does not cause problems. > >> > >> Ah, now I get your question. > >> > >>> I asked about because devices parts seem the same with both qemu but > >>> I not sure about it. > >> > >> We've already switched to qemu-upstream in 4.3. And this patch is not > >> backport material so old system would just work fine IMHO. > >> > >> The only risk of breakage is: users have device_model_version set to > >> qemu-trad and run blktap kernel with Xen pre-4.3, then upgrade to Xen > >> post-4.3 (with this patch). I've tested that, and qemu-trad runs fine > >> for me -- at least it boots and dd works well. > >> > > > > I didn't have a VHD image (format commonly supported by blktap and qemu) > > at hand so the test was not complete. But qemu-trad and qemu-xen are > > both maintained so even if it breaks we are able to fix them -- which is > > main point of this patch, to let users have better supported backend. > > I might be completely wrong, but wasn't there a problem when using > blktap VHD images with Qemu (ie VHD images created with blktap weren't > copatible with VHD Qemu implementation)? Do you mean that timestamp bug in libvhd [0]? Oh that's not fixed in OSS Xen. Ian, do you think it is necessary to have [1] ported to OSS Xen? Then there's all the old images needed to be converted. However this is a necessary step sooner or later if users migrate these images to newer Xen + newer kernel which don't have blktap anymore. Wei. [0] http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2013-02/msg01326.html [1] https://github.com/xapi-project/blktap/commit/a79ac2c05f97c2384bbf981419f329f184dc646a _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |