Thanks，Michal
I understand what you mean， and I have sent the second patch “PATCH
v2”，please review it. :)
Jie
On 2019/5/31 16:55, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 5/31/19 10:06 AM, wangjie (P) wrote:
Hi, Michal:
Sorry, I don't think out which case make us to do that, what are
the
On 5/31/19 10:06 AM, wangjie (P) wrote:
Hi, Michal:
Sorry, I don't think out which case make us to do that, what are
the risks? can you give me an example?
Well, qemuProcessKillManagedPRDaemon() not only kills pr-helper process
but it also cleans up after it. If we receive DISCONNECTED
Hi, Michal:
Sorry, I don't think out which case make us to do that, what are
the risks? can you give me an example?
On 2019/5/31 15:21, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 5/31/19 9:19 AM, wangjie (P) wrote:
Hi, Michal:
Do you mean we should also remove "if (!priv->prDaemonRunning)"
in
On 5/31/19 9:19 AM, wangjie (P) wrote:
Hi, Michal:
Do you mean we should also remove "if (!priv->prDaemonRunning)" in
qemuProcessKillManagedPRDaemon ? I don't understand why do that, can you
tell me more details?
Yes. I mean exactly that.
Michal
--
libvir-list mailing list
Hi, Michal:
Do you mean we should also remove "if (!priv->prDaemonRunning)" in
qemuProcessKillManagedPRDaemon ? I don't understand why do that, can you
tell me more details?
On 2019/5/30 18:22, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 5/29/19 11:44 AM, Jie Wang wrote:
if libvirt receive DISCONNECTED
On 5/29/19 11:44 AM, Jie Wang wrote:
if libvirt receive DISCONNECTED event and set prDaemonRunning to false,
and qemuDomainRemoveDiskDevice is performing in the meantime.
qemuDomainRemoveDiskDevice will return directly by prDaemonRunning
check, so the pr-helper0 object will remain. I think it is
if libvirt receive DISCONNECTED event and set prDaemonRunning to false,
and qemuDomainRemoveDiskDevice is performing in the meantime.
qemuDomainRemoveDiskDevice will return directly by prDaemonRunning
check, so the pr-helper0 object will remain. I think it is no need to
check prDaemonRunning in
