Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 2/2] sanlock: don't fail with unregistered domains

2014-05-13 Thread Martin Kletzander
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 07:25:29AM -0400, John Ferlan wrote: On 05/12/2014 09:37 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote: When a domain was started without registration in sanlock, but libvirt was restarted after that, most of the operations failed due to contacting sanlock about that process. E.g. migrati

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 2/2] sanlock: don't fail with unregistered domains

2014-05-13 Thread John Ferlan
On 05/12/2014 09:37 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote: > When a domain was started without registration in sanlock, but libvirt > was restarted after that, most of the operations failed due to > contacting sanlock about that process. E.g. migration could not be > performed because the locks couldn't b

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 2/2] sanlock: don't fail with unregistered domains

2014-05-12 Thread Eric Blake
On 05/12/2014 07:37 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote: > When a domain was started without registration in sanlock, but libvirt > was restarted after that, most of the operations failed due to > contacting sanlock about that process. E.g. migration could not be > performed because the locks couldn't be

[libvirt] [PATCH 2/2] sanlock: don't fail with unregistered domains

2014-05-12 Thread Martin Kletzander
When a domain was started without registration in sanlock, but libvirt was restarted after that, most of the operations failed due to contacting sanlock about that process. E.g. migration could not be performed because the locks couldn't be released (or inquired before a release). Resolves: https