Re: [libvirt-users] Locking without virtlockd (nor sanlock)?

On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 14:08:03 +0000, Daniel Berrange wrote: > As above, QEMU's locking is good enough to rely on for file based > images.

> The flaws I mention with libvirt might actually finally be something > we > have fixed in 5.10.0 with QEMU 4.2.0, since we can finally use > "blockdev" > syntax for configuring disks. Copying Peter to confirm/deny this... The main issue was that we were leaking locks on the backing chain. This should be now fixed with -blockdev as we call the appropriate apis to lock/unlock the images but I didn't try it with virtlockd. Certainly if there's still a problem now we have well defined places where we know what's happening to images so it should be easy to fix them.