On 03.06.2016 11:07, Fam Zheng wrote:
> Somehow in my locking series, I missed this case where concurrent access
> to an image is performed, perhaps we can remove this case independently.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng
> ---
> tests/qemu-iotests/095 | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Thank
On 03.06.2016 11:07, Fam Zheng wrote:
> Somehow in my locking series, I missed this case where concurrent access
> to an image is performed, perhaps we can remove this case independently.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng
> ---
> tests/qemu-iotests/095 | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Thank
On Fri, 06/03 16:52, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 03.06.2016 11:07, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > Somehow in my locking series, I missed this case where concurrent access
> > to an image is performed, perhaps we can remove this case independently.
>
> The patch itself is good, but this commit message will not mak
On 03.06.2016 11:07, Fam Zheng wrote:
> Somehow in my locking series, I missed this case where concurrent access
> to an image is performed, perhaps we can remove this case independently.
The patch itself is good, but this commit message will not make much
sense in the git log. I'd be fine with re
Somehow in my locking series, I missed this case where concurrent access
to an image is performed, perhaps we can remove this case independently.
Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng
---
tests/qemu-iotests/095 | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tests/qemu-iotests/095 b/tests/qemu-iotests/
