From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:55436)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1TtFn9-0005BS-4N
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 05:55:24 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1TtFn7-0001Ff-U2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 05:55:23 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:49795)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1TtFn7-0001FX-M1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 05:55:21 -0500
Message-ID: <50EE9E14.8080206@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:55:16 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <50EE8810.7080507@dlhnet.de> <50EE95AA.4010904@redhat.com>
	<45632759-2B75-4F8B-9468-444F7ADC2210@dlhnet.de>
In-Reply-To: <45632759-2B75-4F8B-9468-444F7ADC2210@dlhnet.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] block: init bs->io_base correctly to avoid
	locking
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: Peter Lieven <pl@dlhnet.de>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

Il 10/01/2013 11:52, Peter Lieven ha scritto:
>> > Also, perhaps you can just call
>> > 
>> >    bdrv_exceed_io_limits(bs, 0, 0, NULL);
> won`t this segfault if only one of bps or ions limit is set?
> in this case it reads wait before returning false in
> bdrv_exceed_{bps,iops}_limits().

I didn't see any accesses that aren't checked with "if (wait)".  Am I
blind? :)

Paolo