From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45847) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TQboF-00035m-IX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 06:34:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TQbo9-0007Sv-Hx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 06:34:07 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:23735) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TQbo9-0007So-Ag for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 06:34:01 -0400 Message-ID: <5086728B.1010809@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:33:47 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] nbd: Only try to send flush/discard commands if connected to the NBD server List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: nick@bytemark.co.uk Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Am 22.10.2012 13:09, schrieb nick@bytemark.co.uk: > > This is unlikely to come up now, but is a necessary prerequisite for reconnection > behaviour. > > Signed-off-by: Nick Thomas > --- > block/nbd.c | 13 +++++++++++-- > 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) What's the real requirement here? Silently ignoring a flush and returning success for it feels wrong. Why is it correct? Kevin