[...]
>>
>> In testing with your patches, I did find I could only do at most one
>> attach/detach cycle - a second attach for a running guest results in:
>>
>> error: internal error: unable to execute QEMU command 'chardev-add':
>> attempt to add duplicate property 'charchannel0' to object (type
On 2/13/19 2:39 PM, John Ferlan wrote:
On 2/13/19 5:58 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 2/12/19 11:19 PM, John Ferlan wrote:
On 2/11/19 10:40 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1624204
The guestfwd channels are -netdevs really. Hotunplug them as
such.
On 2/13/19 5:58 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> On 2/12/19 11:19 PM, John Ferlan wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/11/19 10:40 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1624204
>>>
>>> The guestfwd channels are -netdevs really. Hotunplug them as
>>> such. Also, DEVICE_DELETED
On 2/12/19 11:19 PM, John Ferlan wrote:
On 2/11/19 10:40 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1624204
The guestfwd channels are -netdevs really. Hotunplug them as
such. Also, DEVICE_DELETED event is not triggered (surprisingly,
since we're not issuing
On 2/11/19 10:40 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1624204
>
> The guestfwd channels are -netdevs really. Hotunplug them as
> such. Also, DEVICE_DELETED event is not triggered (surprisingly,
> since we're not issuing device_del rather than netdev_del)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1624204
The guestfwd channels are -netdevs really. Hotunplug them as
such. Also, DEVICE_DELETED event is not triggered (surprisingly,
since we're not issuing device_del rather than netdev_del) and
associated chardev is removed automagically too. This
