[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/1] block: Handle NULL options correctly in
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/1] block: Handle NULL options correctly in raw_open
Mon, 13 Mar 2017 11:15:22 +0100
Am 13.03.2017 um 04:31 hat Dong Jia Shi geschrieben:
> * Dong Jia Shi <address@hidden> [2017-03-08 17:31:05 +0800]:
> > * Kevin Wolf <address@hidden> [2017-03-08 10:13:46 +0100]:
> > > Am 08.03.2017 um 03:15 hat Dong Jia Shi geschrieben:
> > > > A normal call for raw_open should always pass in a non-NULL @options,
> > > > but for some certain cases (e.g. trying to applying snapshot on a RBD
> > > > image), they call raw_open with a NULL @options right after the calling
> > > > for raw_close.
> > > >
> > > > Let's take the NULL @options as a sign of trying to do raw_open again,
> > > > and just simply return a success code.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dong Jia Shi <address@hidden>
> > >
> > > I think we rather need to fix bdrv_snapshot_goto() so that it doesn't
> > > pass NULL, but the actual options that were given for the node (i.e.
> > > bs->options).
> > I've tried that before the current try. bs->options does not have the
> > "file" key-value pair, so that leads to a fail too. Should we put "file"
> > in to the options manually? I noticed that it was removed from
> > bs->options during the calling of bdrv_open_inherit.
> Hi Kevin,
> After thinking for quite some time, I still don't think we need to fix
> the caller. The reason is that raw_close always does nothing, so no
> matter what the caller passing in, raw_open should do nothing but just
> return 0.
raw is not the only format driver in qemu.