On 06/22/10 - 03:33:43PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 06/15/2010 06:35 AM, Chris Lalancette wrote:
> > On 06/15/10 - 01:13:00PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >> You're accessing 'driver' here without first locking it
> >
> > D'oh, of course. Thanks for that. Updated patch below.
> >
> >
> >>From 56b
On 06/15/2010 06:35 AM, Chris Lalancette wrote:
> On 06/15/10 - 01:13:00PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> You're accessing 'driver' here without first locking it
>
> D'oh, of course. Thanks for that. Updated patch below.
>
>
>>From 56b1d0463790b52e23975968c54d4f9f9a3c5fbd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 20
On 06/15/10 - 01:13:00PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > @@ -11179,6 +11179,7 @@ out:
> > static int
> > qemudNodeDeviceDettach (virNodeDevicePtr dev)
> > {
> > +struct qemud_driver *driver = dev->conn->privateData;
> > pciDevice *pci;
> > unsigned domain, bus, slot, function;
> >
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 08:03:11AM -0400, Chris Lalancette wrote:
> In the current libvirt PCI code, there is no checking whether
> a PCI device is in use by a guest when doing node device
> detach or reattach. This causes problems when a device is
> assigned to a guest, and the administrator star
In the current libvirt PCI code, there is no checking whether
a PCI device is in use by a guest when doing node device
detach or reattach. This causes problems when a device is
assigned to a guest, and the administrator starts issuing
nodedevice commands. Make it so that we check the list
of acti
