On Wed, 05/13 17:25, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 13/05/2015 17:17, Fam Zheng wrote:
> >> >
> >> > It can be the topic of a separate series. But this patch brings a
> >> > false sense of security (either the blocker is unnecessary, or it
> >> > needs to last after bdrv_drain returns), so I thi
On 13/05/2015 17:17, Fam Zheng wrote:
>> >
>> > It can be the topic of a separate series. But this patch brings a
>> > false sense of security (either the blocker is unnecessary, or it
>> > needs to last after bdrv_drain returns), so I think it should be
>> > dropped.
> Doesn't this let bdrv_dr
On Wed, 05/13 13:33, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 13/05/2015 13:08, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > > I think this isn't enough. It's the callers of bdrv_drain and
> > > bdrv_drain_all that need to block before drain and unblock before
> > > aio_context_release.
> >
> > Which callers do you mean? qmp_tra
On 13/05/2015 13:08, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > I think this isn't enough. It's the callers of bdrv_drain and
> > bdrv_drain_all that need to block before drain and unblock before
> > aio_context_release.
>
> Which callers do you mean? qmp_transaction is covered in this series.
All of them. :(
In s
On Wed, 05/13 12:26, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 13/05/2015 19:28, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > We don't want new requests from guest, so block the operation around the
> > nested poll.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng
> > ---
> > block/io.c | 12
> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>
On 13/05/2015 19:28, Fam Zheng wrote:
> We don't want new requests from guest, so block the operation around the
> nested poll.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng
> ---
> block/io.c | 12
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/block/io.c b/block/io.c
> index 1ce62c4..d369d
We don't want new requests from guest, so block the operation around the
nested poll.
Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng
---
block/io.c | 12
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
diff --git a/block/io.c b/block/io.c
index 1ce62c4..d369de3 100644
--- a/block/io.c
+++ b/block/io.c
@@ -289,9 +289,1
