I found that there are many spelling errors in the comments of qemu,
so I used the spellcheck tool to check the spelling errors
and finally found some spelling errors in the docs folder.
Signed-off-by: zhaolichang <zhaolichang@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Message-Id: <20200917075029.313-4-zhaolichang@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu>
Commit fe0480d6 and friends added BDRV_REQ_NO_FALLBACK as a way to
avoid wasting time on a preliminary write-zero request that will later
be rewritten by actual data, if it is known that the write-zero
request will use a slow fallback; but in doing so, could not optimize
for NBD. The NBD specification is now considering an extension that
will allow passing on those semantics; this patch updates the new
protocol bits and 'qemu-nbd --list' output to recognize the bit, as
well as the new errno value possible when using the new flag; while
upcoming patches will improve the client to use the feature when
present, and the server to advertise support for it.
The NBD spec recommends (but not requires) that ENOTSUP be avoided for
all but failures of a fast zero (the only time it is mandatory to
avoid an ENOTSUP failure is when fast zero is supported but not
requested during write zeroes; the questionable use is for ENOTSUP to
other actions like a normal write request). However, clients that get
an unexpected ENOTSUP will either already be treating it the same as
EINVAL, or may appreciate the extra bit of information. We were
equally loose for returning EOVERFLOW in more situations than
recommended by the spec, so if it turns out to be a problem in
practice, a later patch can tighten handling for both error codes.
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20190823143726.27062-3-eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
[eblake: tweak commit message, also handle EOPNOTSUPP]
The NBD specification defines NBD_FLAG_CAN_MULTI_CONN, which can be
advertised when the server promises cache consistency between
simultaneous clients (basically, rules that determine what FUA and
flush from one client are able to guarantee for reads from another
client). When we don't permit simultaneous clients (such as qemu-nbd
without -e), the bit makes no sense; and for writable images, we
probably have a lot more work before we can declare that actions from
one client are cache-consistent with actions from another. But for
read-only images, where flush isn't changing any data, we might as
well advertise multi-conn support. What's more, advertisement of the
bit makes it easier for clients to determine if 'qemu-nbd -e' was in
use, where a second connection will succeed rather than hang until the
first client goes away.
This patch affects qemu as server in advertising the bit. We may want
to consider patches to qemu as client to attempt parallel connections
for higher throughput by spreading the load over those connections
when a server advertises multi-conn, but for now sticking to one
connection per nbd:// BDS is okay.
See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1708300
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20190815185024.7010-1-eblake@redhat.com>
[eblake: tweak blockdev-nbd.c to not request shared when writable,
fix iotest 233]
Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
It can be useful to figure out which NBD protocol features are
exposed by a server, as well as what features a client will
take advantage of if available, for a given qemu release. It's
not always precise to base features on version numbers (thanks
to downstream backports), but any documentation is better than
making users search through git logs themselves.
This patch originally stemmed from a request to document that
pristine 3.0 has a known bug where NBD_OPT_LIST_META_CONTEXT
with 0 queries forgot to advertise an available
"qemu:dirty-bitmap" context, but documenting bugs like this (or
the fact that 3.0 also botched NBD_CMD_CACHE) gets to be too
much details, especially since buggy releases will be less
likely connection targets over time. Instead, I chose to just
remind users to check stable release branches.
Suggested-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20181215135324.152629-3-eblake@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
