On (Mon) 04 Apr 2011 [16:04:40], Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 19:57:06 +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> > On (Thu) 17 Mar 2011 [17:56:59], Amit Shah wrote:
> > > On (Thu) 17 Mar 2011 [15:26:28], Rusty Russell wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:12:10 +0530, Amit Shah
> > > > wrote:
> >
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 19:57:06 +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> On (Thu) 17 Mar 2011 [17:56:59], Amit Shah wrote:
> > On (Thu) 17 Mar 2011 [15:26:28], Rusty Russell wrote:
> > > On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:12:10 +0530, Amit Shah
> > > wrote:
> > > > When detaching a buffer from a vq, the avail.idx value shoul
On (Thu) 17 Mar 2011 [17:56:59], Amit Shah wrote:
> On (Thu) 17 Mar 2011 [15:26:28], Rusty Russell wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:12:10 +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> > > When detaching a buffer from a vq, the avail.idx value should be
> > > decremented as well.
> > >
> > > This was noticed by hot-
On (Thu) 17 Mar 2011 [15:26:28], Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:12:10 +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> > When detaching a buffer from a vq, the avail.idx value should be
> > decremented as well.
> >
> > This was noticed by hot-unplugging a virtio console port and then
> > plugging in a ne
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:12:10 +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> When detaching a buffer from a vq, the avail.idx value should be
> decremented as well.
>
> This was noticed by hot-unplugging a virtio console port and then
> plugging in a new one on the same number (re-using the vqs which were
> just 'diso
When detaching a buffer from a vq, the avail.idx value should be
decremented as well.
This was noticed by hot-unplugging a virtio console port and then
plugging in a new one on the same number (re-using the vqs which were
just 'disowned'). qemu reported
'Guest moved used index from 0 to 256'
