qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu commit 65207c59 broke libvirt's capability retriev


From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu commit 65207c59 broke libvirt's capability retrieval (apparently)
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 14:55:55 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)

Laszlo Ersek <address@hidden> writes:

> On 06/05/15 23:47, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 06/05/2015 03:42 PM, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> 
>>> I found this qemu commit, ie.
>>>
>>> commit 65207c59d99f2260c5f1d3b9c491146616a522aa
>>> Author: Markus Armbruster <address@hidden>
>>> Date:   Thu Mar 5 14:35:26 2015 +0100
>>>
>>>     monitor: Drop broken, unused asynchronous command interface
>>>
>>> with bisection. Unfortunately, the bisection was extremely painful,
>>> because between a working version and today's pull, part of the
>>> qemu history was uncompileable. It was ultimately fixed with
>> 
>>> Which tells me that it's not individual capabilities that are
>>> broken by qemu 65207c59, but the entire libvirt capability
>>> retrieval. Apparently libvirt is one user of that async monitor
>>> interface. (The message on commit 65207c59 itself mentions
>>> "qmp_capabilities".)
>> 
>> Libvirt doesn't use async capabilities, so much as Markus accidentally
>> broke the QMP protocol by completely ditching support for the "id"
>> member that libvirt uses on every synchronous QMP command.  Several
>> threads already exist on the matter:
>> 
>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-06/msg01806.html
>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-06/msg01488.html
>> 
>
> Fantastic, I was wondering how I could remedy this (without having to
> rebase my work in progress onto 65207c59^). Your second link seems to
> have a fix I can apply locally, temporarily. (Hm, well, your first link
> does too, just with different comments, as you said.)
>
> Many thanks!

Fixed in current master: commit 779cec4.  Sorry for the inconvenience!



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]