[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] virtio-scsi: Allocate op blocker reason before
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] virtio-scsi: Allocate op blocker reason before blocking
Tue, 24 Feb 2015 09:24:08 -0700
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
On 02/24/2015 07:03 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 2015-02-24 at 04:43, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Max Reitz <address@hidden> writes:
>>> s->blocker is really only used in hw/scsi/virtio-scsi.c; the only places
>>> where it is used in hw/scsi/virtio-scsi-dataplane.c is when it is
>>> allocated and when it is freed. That does not make a whole lot of sense
>>> (and is actually wrong because this leads to s->blocker potentially
>>> being NULL when blk_op_block_all() is called in virtio-scsi.c), so move
>>> the allocation and destruction of s->blocker to blk_op_block_all() and
>>> blk_op_unblock_all() in virtio-scsi.c, respectively.
>> Why do you put your nice reproducer below the --- divider? I rather
>> like bug fixing commits come with reproducers in the commit message.
As do I :)
> Because then I'm afraid that Eric complains because I used echo -e
> instead of printf.
I might point out the non-portability, but for a commit message, I'm
perfectly fine leaving a non-portable construct in place. I'm only
going to ask for a respin if 'echo -e' is used in the patch body.
> Seriously speaking, I don't mind putting it into the commit message.
> I'll wait for reviews on the change itself, and then either send a v2
> with the reproducer included in the commit message or hope for a
> maintainer to fix it up himself (which I'd be totally fine with *hint
Up to the maintainer on that front, but if it helps, then with the
amended commit message:
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Description: OpenPGP digital signature