On 01/18/2013 06:21 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
Scratch that; I just reread the function. qemuDomainManagedSave used qemuDomObjFromDomainDriver(), which returns driver locked; so commit 2745177 is correct, and there is no locking bug here, and _your_ hunk would make it wrong.
right, my apologies, I was mislead by my typo-in-commit-message theory, see below.
Yuck. You _still_ haven't fixed DomainHasManagedSaveImage (which 8c5d2ba claimed to fix), and we've found yet another bogus commit. We need a v2 of this patch that scrubs ALL of the bugs at once.
This is still true - we need a v2 of the patch that fixes all of the bugs, it's just that there are fewer bugs than I was worried about, because right now it looks like there is only one bogus commit, not two.
This exactly is the crux: I have no clue what the intended fix would be. This function didn't hold a driver lock before the commit, so how can it be relaxed then? This was what lead me to the wrong conclusion hat qemuManagedSave was meant. So, before I send out a revised patch: do you think there's anything to do for qemuDomainHasManagedSaveImage and if so, what? -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen/Kind Regards Viktor Mihajlovski IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martina Köderitz Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294