From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Qemu-KVM 0.12.3 and Multipath -> Assertion Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 19:07:06 +0200 Message-ID: <20100504170706.GA21339@lst.de> References: <4BDF3F94.1080608@dlh.net> <4BDFDC44.9030808@redhat.com> <4BE00750.6040804@dlh.net> <4BE01120.30608@redhat.com> <4BE02440.6010802@dlh.net> <4BE028BF.1000603@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Peter Lieven , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Kevin Wolf Return-path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.210]:43953 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760064Ab0EDRH1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 May 2010 13:07:27 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BE028BF.1000603@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 04:01:35PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Great, I'm going to submit it as a proper patch then. > > Christoph, by now I'm pretty sure it's right, but can you have another > look if this is correct, anyway? It looks correct to me - we really shouldn't update the the fields until bdrv_aio_cancel has returned. In fact we cannot cancel a request more often than we can, so there's a fairly high chance it will complete. Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig