Re: [Qemu-devel] drive_del vs. device_del: what should come first?

2014-04-25 Thread Heinz Graalfs
On 23/04/14 15:01, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 02:47:20PM +0200, Heinz Graalfs wrote: Hello Markus, I finally managed to reproduce the problem, at least once ... The scenario was: dd if=/dev/vdx1 of=partitionone followed by a virsh detach... (with the device_del() under

Re: [Qemu-devel] drive_del vs. device_del: what should come first?

2014-04-23 Thread Stefan Hajnoczi
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 02:47:20PM +0200, Heinz Graalfs wrote: Hello Markus, I finally managed to reproduce the problem, at least once ... The scenario was: dd if=/dev/vdx1 of=partitionone followed by a virsh detach... (with the device_del() under the cover) during active dd processing

Re: [Qemu-devel] drive_del vs. device_del: what should come first?

2014-04-11 Thread Heinz Graalfs
Hello Markus, I finally managed to reproduce the problem, at least once ... The scenario was: dd if=/dev/vdx1 of=partitionone followed by a virsh detach... (with the device_del() under the cover) during active dd processing dmesg shows: [79026.220718] User process fault: interruption code

Re: [Qemu-devel] drive_del vs. device_del: what should come first?

2014-04-03 Thread Heinz Graalfs
On 02/04/14 19:40, Markus Armbruster wrote: Heinz Graalfs graa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes: On 01/04/14 17:48, Markus Armbruster wrote: Heinz Graalfs graa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes: Hi Kevin, doing a virsh detach-device ... ends up in the following QEMU monitor commands: 1.

Re: [Qemu-devel] drive_del vs. device_del: what should come first?

2014-04-02 Thread Heinz Graalfs
On 01/04/14 17:48, Markus Armbruster wrote: Heinz Graalfs graa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes: Hi Kevin, doing a virsh detach-device ... ends up in the following QEMU monitor commands: 1. device_del ... 2. drive_del ... qmp_device_del() performs the device unplug path. In case of a

Re: [Qemu-devel] drive_del vs. device_del: what should come first?

2014-04-02 Thread Markus Armbruster
Heinz Graalfs graa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes: On 01/04/14 17:48, Markus Armbruster wrote: Heinz Graalfs graa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes: Hi Kevin, doing a virsh detach-device ... ends up in the following QEMU monitor commands: 1. device_del ... 2. drive_del ...

[Qemu-devel] drive_del vs. device_del: what should come first?

2014-04-01 Thread Heinz Graalfs
Hi Kevin, doing a virsh detach-device ... ends up in the following QEMU monitor commands: 1. device_del ... 2. drive_del ... qmp_device_del() performs the device unplug path. In case of a block device do_drive_del() tries to prevent further IO against the host device. However,

Re: [Qemu-devel] drive_del vs. device_del: what should come first?

2014-04-01 Thread Markus Armbruster
Heinz Graalfs graa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes: Hi Kevin, doing a virsh detach-device ... ends up in the following QEMU monitor commands: 1. device_del ... 2. drive_del ... qmp_device_del() performs the device unplug path. In case of a block device do_drive_del() tries to