From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59769) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1afLQy-0008Je-HX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 01:52:53 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1afLQv-0004du-C3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 01:52:52 -0400 Received: from mail.ispras.ru ([83.149.199.45]:47763) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1afLQv-0004dp-4B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 01:52:49 -0400 From: "Pavel Dovgalyuk" References: <20160310115551.4812.55431.stgit@PASHA-ISP> <20160310115620.4812.87175.stgit@PASHA-ISP> <20160311135855.GA26287@stefanha-x1.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20160311135855.GA26287@stefanha-x1.localdomain> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 08:52:46 +0300 Message-ID: <002401d17db5$bbea44a0$33becde0$@ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: ru Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 5/5] replay: introduce block devices record/replay List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: 'Stefan Hajnoczi' , 'Pavel Dovgalyuk' Cc: edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com, peter.maydell@linaro.org, igor.rubinov@gmail.com, mark.burton@greensocs.com, real@ispras.ru, hines@cert.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, maria.klimushenkova@ispras.ru, kwolf@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, batuzovk@ispras.ru, alex.bennee@linaro.org, fred.konrad@greensocs.com > From: Stefan Hajnoczi [mailto:stefanha@redhat.com] > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 02:56:20PM +0300, Pavel Dovgalyuk wrote: > > @@ -135,7 +138,7 @@ void replay_add_event(ReplayAsyncEventKind event_kind, > > > > void replay_bh_schedule_event(QEMUBH *bh) > > { > > - if (replay_mode != REPLAY_MODE_NONE) { > > + if (replay_mode != REPLAY_MODE_NONE && events_enabled) { > > uint64_t id = replay_get_current_step(); > > replay_add_event(REPLAY_ASYNC_EVENT_BH, bh, NULL, id); > > } else { > > Is this hunk a fix that should be in a separate patch or squashed into a > previous patch? Right, this is a fix of a separate bug. It manifests itself only with this block patch, but I can separate it for clearness. Pavel Dovgalyuk