On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 08:30:45AM +0200, Markus Pargmann wrote:
>> Thanks for the explanations. I think my understanding was off by one ;)..
>> I didn't realize that the DO_IT thread from the userspace has the block
>>
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 08:30:45AM +0200, Markus Pargmann wrote:
>> Thanks for the explanations. I think my understanding was off by one ;)..
>> I didn't realize that the DO_IT thread from the userspace has the block
>> device open as
Hey Markus,
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> Hi Pranay,
>
> On Tuesday 14 June 2016 15:03:40 Pranay Srivastava wrote:
>> Hi Markus,
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Markus Pargmann wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thursday 02 June
Hey Markus,
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> Hi Pranay,
>
> On Tuesday 14 June 2016 15:03:40 Pranay Srivastava wrote:
>> Hi Markus,
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Markus Pargmann wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thursday 02 June 2016 13:25:00 Pranay Kr. Srivastava wrote:
>>
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 08:30:45AM +0200, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> Thanks for the explanations. I think my understanding was off by one ;)..
> I didn't realize that the DO_IT thread from the userspace has the block
> device open as well.
Obviously, otherwise it couldn't do an ioctl() to it :-)
>
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 08:30:45AM +0200, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> Thanks for the explanations. I think my understanding was off by one ;)..
> I didn't realize that the DO_IT thread from the userspace has the block
> device open as well.
Obviously, otherwise it couldn't do an ioctl() to it :-)
>
Hi Pranay,
On Tuesday 14 June 2016 15:03:40 Pranay Srivastava wrote:
> Hi Markus,
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday 02 June 2016 13:25:00 Pranay Kr. Srivastava wrote:
> > > When a timeout occurs or a recv fails, then
> > >
Hi Pranay,
On Tuesday 14 June 2016 15:03:40 Pranay Srivastava wrote:
> Hi Markus,
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday 02 June 2016 13:25:00 Pranay Kr. Srivastava wrote:
> > > When a timeout occurs or a recv fails, then
> > > instead of abruplty
Hi Markus,
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Markus Pargmann wrote:
>
> On Thursday 02 June 2016 13:25:00 Pranay Kr. Srivastava wrote:
> > When a timeout occurs or a recv fails, then
> > instead of abruplty killing nbd block device
> > wait for it's users to finish.
> >
> >
Hi Markus,
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Markus Pargmann wrote:
>
> On Thursday 02 June 2016 13:25:00 Pranay Kr. Srivastava wrote:
> > When a timeout occurs or a recv fails, then
> > instead of abruplty killing nbd block device
> > wait for it's users to finish.
> >
> > This is more required
On Thursday 02 June 2016 13:25:00 Pranay Kr. Srivastava wrote:
> When a timeout occurs or a recv fails, then
> instead of abruplty killing nbd block device
> wait for it's users to finish.
>
> This is more required when filesystem(s) like
> ext2 or ext3 don't expect their buffer heads to
>
On Thursday 02 June 2016 13:25:00 Pranay Kr. Srivastava wrote:
> When a timeout occurs or a recv fails, then
> instead of abruplty killing nbd block device
> wait for it's users to finish.
>
> This is more required when filesystem(s) like
> ext2 or ext3 don't expect their buffer heads to
>
When a timeout occurs or a recv fails, then
instead of abruplty killing nbd block device
wait for it's users to finish.
This is more required when filesystem(s) like
ext2 or ext3 don't expect their buffer heads to
disappear while the filesystem is mounted.
Each open of a nbd device is
When a timeout occurs or a recv fails, then
instead of abruplty killing nbd block device
wait for it's users to finish.
This is more required when filesystem(s) like
ext2 or ext3 don't expect their buffer heads to
disappear while the filesystem is mounted.
Each open of a nbd device is
14 matches
Mail list logo