From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60068) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYCFz-0005Cm-6O for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 07:40:00 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYCFv-000700-Vr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 07:39:59 -0500 Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([199.115.105.18]:36309) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYCFv-0006y1-Q1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 07:39:55 -0500 References: <1455259174-3384-1-git-send-email-den@openvz.org> <20160223073926.GE10967@grmbl.mre> <20160223104715.GG2372@grmbl.mre> From: "Denis V. Lunev" Message-ID: <56CC5309.60307@openvz.org> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 15:39:37 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160223104715.GG2372@grmbl.mre> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/2] move qcow2_invalidate_cache() out of coroutine context List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Amit Shah Cc: Paolo Bonzini , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela On 02/23/2016 01:47 PM, Amit Shah wrote: > Hi Denis, > > On (Tue) 23 Feb 2016 [13:09:26], Amit Shah wrote: >> On (Fri) 12 Feb 2016 [09:39:32], Denis V. Lunev wrote: >>> There is a possibility to hit an assert in qcow2_get_specific_info that >>> s->qcow_version is undefined. This happens when VM in starting from >>> suspended state, i.e. it processes incoming migration, and in the same >>> time 'info block' is called. >>> >>> The problem is that qcow2_invalidate_cache() closes the image and >>> memset()s BDRVQcowState in the middle. >>> >>> This operation should not be performed in coroutine context. >>> >>> Changes from v1: >>> - fixed spelling. Eric, thank you for spell checking >> BTW I noticed this just now: the commit subject line for both the >> patches is the same. Please avoid that in the future. > The pull req failed to apply due to another patchset - could you > please do a v3 with better subject lines for the patches? > > Thanks, > > Amit no prob, I'll send new patch later today.