From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Vrabel Subject: Re: netback Oops then xenwatch stuck in D state Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 11:25:09 +0000 Message-ID: <511CC995.6050709@cantab.net> References: <510C3AA3.2090508@theshore.net> <50E3A390-C52B-476A-8B20-BADBA42F3775@theshore.net> <51181924.4050500@theshore.net> <1360583103.16636.29.camel@zion.uk.xensource.com> <1360663133.20449.123.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <511AFFC9.3050404@theshore.net> <1360779868.16636.92.camel@zion.uk.xensource.com> <1360780669.16636.94.camel@zion.uk.xensource.com> <511BE780.9000707@cantab.net> <20130213201725.GA1453@zion.uk.xensource.com> <511CB86702000078000BE1C5@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <511CB86702000078000BE1C5@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Wei Liu , Ian Campbell , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 14/02/13 09:11, Jan Beulich wrote: > > I first thought so too when looking at this again yesterday, but > then convinced myself that this double put _here_ is correct. And > Ian's patch specifically removed to call to netbk_tx_err() after the > caller netbk_count_requests() recognized the error, knowing that > the latter function now itself issues a call to netbk_fatal_tx_err() > (whether that wouldn't better have replaced the caller's call to > netbk_tx_err() is a different question). Yes, I agree. I had too many different versions of netback open and got confused. David