On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 10:18:25AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:42:35PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:53:01PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > >> > Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> writes: > >> > > >> > > Previously we cleanup the queues when we got CLOSED event. It was used > >> > > >> > we clean up > >> > > >> > > to make sure we won't leftover replies/events of a old client to a new > >> > > >> > we won't send leftover replies/events of an old client > >> > > >> > > client. Now this patch postpones that until OPENED. > >> > > >> > What if OPENED never comes? > >> > >> Then we clean that up until destruction of the monitor. IMHO it's > >> fine, but I'm not sure whether that's an overall acceptable approach. > > > > I think this patch fixes the problem at the wrong level. Marc-André's > > fix seemed like a cleaner solution. > > Is it the right solution? > > I proposed another one:
Sorry, I won't be able to participate in this because I'm behind on other patches and tasks. Therefore, feel free to disregard but I'll give my 2 cents: This seems like a chardev bug. The solution should probably be in the chardev layer (Marc-André's patch or something else), not in the monitor (this patch). Even if there is a monitor change, it's probably necessary to at least clarify the meaning of the CLOSE event to reduce the chance of similar bugs in future chardev users. Stefan
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature