[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-nbd vs 'simple' trace backend vs iotest 147

From: Stefan Hajnoczi
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-nbd vs 'simple' trace backend vs iotest 147
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 17:30:14 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17)

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 03:33:21PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> The other qemu-nbds (the inet and the unix socket ones from the first
> run, the second inet one from the second run) have a single thread with
> the same backtrace I posted above.

We just discussed this on IRC, but for the record:

qemu-nbd --fork will fork the process after the simpletrace write-out
thread has been spawned.  The child process lacks this thread (due to
how fork(2) handles multithreading).  Either qemu-nbd needs to
initialize tracing later (but that means we cannot trace early init) or
simpletrace needs a way to respawn the write-out thread.

I have put this on my TODO list but I'm not sure how soon I'll get
around to it.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

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