Am 27.09.2012 14:08, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > Il 27/09/2012 14:03, Kevin Wolf ha scritto: >>>> /** >>>> - * block_job_cancel: >>>> + * block_job_cancel_sync: >>>> * @job: The job to be canceled. >>>> * >>>> - * Asynchronously cancel the job and wait for it to reach a quiescent >>>> + * Synchronously cancel the job and wait for it to reach a quiescent >>>> * state. Note that the completion callback will still be called >>>> * asynchronously, hence it is *not* valid to call #bdrv_delete >>>> * immediately after #block_job_cancel_sync. Users of block jobs >> I still don't agree with the s/Async/Sync/, in my opinion it contradicts >> the rest of the comment. If it did cancel the job synchronously, then >> the job would be immediately completed, and there would be no need to >> wait for a quiescent state nor would the completion callback occur later. > > Now that I read it again, the comment is obsolete. > > block_job_cancel_sync stalls until block_job_cancel_cb is called, and > that calls the completion callback.
Okay. Best you rephrase the whole comment then instead of changing just one word. Kevin
