Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
a weak one.
Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a BlockBackend with its
BlockDriverState.
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
a weak one.
Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a
Am 30.09.2014 um 12:56 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
a
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 30.09.2014 um 12:56 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
[...]
Taking back my R-b: You tricked us, this assertion doesn't hold true.
Easy to reproduce by taking a live snapshot. qemu-iotests case 052
catches it.
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:36:03PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Do we have a KVM Forum block layer agenda yet? I think this thread could
already contain a few topics to discuss there.
Being the guy who constantly bring back painfull issues
(Block filters, Block Backend) on the table I think we
Am 22.09.2014 um 18:34 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
diff --git a/include/block/block_int.h b/include/block/block_int.h
index 8d86a6c..14e0b7c 100644
--- a/include/block/block_int.h
+++
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 22.09.2014 um 18:34 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
diff --git a/include/block/block_int.h b/include/block/block_int.h
index 8d86a6c..14e0b7c 100644
Am 23.09.2014 um 14:52 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 22.09.2014 um 18:34 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
diff --git
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 23.09.2014 um 14:52 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 22.09.2014 um 18:34 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
a weak one.
Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a BlockBackend with its
BlockDriverState.
Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com writes:
Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
a weak one.
Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a
On 16.09.2014 20:12, Markus Armbruster wrote:
The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
a weak one.
Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a BlockBackend with its
BlockDriverState. Callers have
The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
a weak one.
Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a BlockBackend with its
BlockDriverState. Callers have to unref both. The commit after next
will
13 matches
Mail list logo
