From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60359)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1VK7tK-0006bL-NM
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 10:29:12 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1VK7tE-0004KU-CT
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 10:29:06 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:10235)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1VK7tE-0004KO-4O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 10:29:00 -0400
Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r8CESwKM017960
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 10:28:59 -0400
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 16:28:54 +0200
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20130912142854.GL3514@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com>
References: <1378990647-14079-1-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1378990647-14079-1-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] block: Assert validity of BdrvActionOps
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

Am 12.09.2013 um 14:57 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
> In qmp_transaction, assert that the BdrvActionOps to be used is actually
> valid.
> 
> This assertion failing is very improbable, however, it might happen, if
> a new TransactionActionKind is introduced "out of order" and the
> actions[] array is not updated.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>

Thanks, applied to the block branch.

Kevin