Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH resubmit] xen-blkfront: Don't send closing notification to backend in blkfront_closing()

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>]

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 03:58:50PM +0800, Joe Jin wrote:
> On 07/14/11 17:12, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 09:55 +0100, Joe Jin wrote:
> >> On 07/14/11 16:13, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 01:47 +0100, Joe Jin wrote:
> > 
> >>>
> >>> I'm wondering if we might not be better off deferring the disconnect on
> >>> the backend side until the frontend enters XenbusStateClosed instead of
> >>> doing it in closing.
> >>
> >> Yes this fix from backend side works too, also this looks reasonable than 
> >> fix in frontend.
> > 
> > I guess there is either a missing "more" or "less" in that sentence ;-)
> > 
> > The nice thing about a backend fix is that you don't need to go round
> > propagating the fix into distros etc and updating existing deployed
> > guests (not to mention non-Linux frontends).
> 
> Indeed ;)
> 
> > 
> > I actually thought blkback had something like this already in older
> > "classic" Xen kernels but it seems like the patch never made it out of
> > the XCP patch queue :-(. See
> > http://xenbits.xen.org/hg/XCP/linux-2.6.32.pq.hg/file/tip/CA-7672-blkback-shutdown.patch
> > (which appears to also incorporate a toolstack directed graceful
> > shutdown of some sort as well as deferring the device close).
> > 
> > Daniel, do you know of any plans to extricate that stuff from the XCP
> > patch queue for upstream? Are there any other patches (e.g. incremental
> > fixes) in that pq which should go along with it?
> 
> Looking forward push this patch to upstream!

Not sure if Daniel is going to get to this. Joe, and chance you could
take a look at it and up-port in the 3.0 kernel?