qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 0/3] 9p: Fix file ID collisions


From: Christian Schoenebeck
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 0/3] 9p: Fix file ID collisions
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 17:03:23 +0200

On Montag, 23. September 2019 16:46:53 CEST Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > > > I'll do some
> > > > > more manual testing and issue a PR when I'm confident enough.
> > > > 
> > > > That would be highly appreciated! So far I am the only one ever having
> > > > tested this patch set at all!
> > > 
> > > Just to clarify, I won't thoroughly test it. My main concern is that it
> > > doesn't break things.
> > 
> > So in other words you are only going to test the default behaviour
> > --multidevs=warn?
> 
> This I've already done, along with multidevs=forbid.
> 
> Now I plan to run the PJD test suite from Tuxera with a simple
> cross-device setup and --multidevs=remap. And that's it.

Well, Ok then, however at least some simple, manual, final "ls -i" of the 
inode numbers on guest would not hurt though. ;-)

> > If yes, and since that would mean I was the only person ever having tested
> > the actual fix, shouldn't --multidevs=remap|forbid better be marked as
> > experimental (docs and runtime warning) for now? Maybe that would also
> > anticipate receiving feedback from people actually using it later on.
> Makes sense. I don't think it is worth having a runtime warning,
> but I'll turn remap to x-remap and amend the docs.

Mwa, I would like to veto against your "x-remap" plan though. Keep in mind I 
also have to send out a patch for libvirt for this fix. Even I would not have 
read "x" to stand for "experimental". So I would definitely favor a runtime 
warning instead of renaming that parameter.

I can send a patch on top for docs and warning if you want.





reply via email to

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