qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for 2.9 v3 00/10] block: Fixes regarding datapla


From: Fam Zheng
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for 2.9 v3 00/10] block: Fixes regarding dataplane and management operations
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 19:55:53 +0800
User-agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23)

On Tue, 04/11 13:05, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 10.04.2017 um 17:05 hat Fam Zheng geschrieben:
> > v3: Respin the unmerged changes from v2 and include one new fix:
> > 
> >     (Yes, it is a big series for the last -rc, and I personally prefer the 
> > v2
> >     approach for the 4-9 part of the problem, which is much more 
> > mechanical.)
> > 
> >     - 1, 2 are redoing previous patch 4, using 
> > bdrv_parent_drained_begin/end.
> >       [Kevin]
> >       Also fix the ordering against aio_context_release. [Stefan]
> >     - 3 is unchanged from patch 6 in v2.
> >     - 4-9 are reworking of patch 5 following Paolo's suggestion, which 
> > allowed
> >       better patch split.
> >     - 10 is finding of a latent bug, which is revealed by patch 9.
> > 
> > v2: - Drop patch 4 in v1. A second thought made me feel neither it nor 
> > Kevin's
> >       suggestion to move the BH process to 
> > bdrv_drain_recurse/BDRV_POLL_WHILE
> >       is a complete fix. So leave it for a separate patch.
> >     - Add rev-by to patches 1, 3, 4.
> >     - Split from patch 1 in v1 and add patch 2, for the new assertions. 
> > [Kevin]
> >     - Rewrite patch 5. Fix block job's co when a BDS is moved to a different
> >       aio context. [Kevin]
> >     - Add patch 6.
> > 
> > Crashes are reported on dataplane devices when doing snapshot and commit 
> > under
> > guest I/O.
> > 
> > With this series, Ed's test case '176' now passes:
> > 
> >     https://github.com/skyportsystems/qemu-1/commits/eswierk-iotests-2.9
> 
> I had only two points for this series. The first is that it adds unused
> functions, which doesn't hurt (but I might just send a PATCH 11/10 to
> remove them again). The second one is that some sheepdog code is
> suspicious, but if anything it just means that this series is incomplete,
> so not a show stopper either.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <address@hidden>

Thanks, I'll squash in the removal patch and send a pull request for 2.9.

Fam



reply via email to

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