From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35441) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZeP8b-0007u6-0i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 11:05:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZeP8Z-0000Co-LO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 11:05:44 -0400 References: <1442589793-7105-1-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com> <1442589793-7105-20-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com> <20150922143012.GE3999@noname.str.redhat.com> From: Max Reitz Message-ID: <56016E3A.1020702@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 17:05:30 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150922143012.GE3999@noname.str.redhat.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1rTGeOATLdoQS43UN3ocNhGmNaqwGcPhH" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 19/38] block: Fail requests to empty BlockBackend List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: Alberto Garcia , qemu-block@nongnu.org, John Snow , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster , Stefan Hajnoczi This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --1rTGeOATLdoQS43UN3ocNhGmNaqwGcPhH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 22.09.2015 16:30, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 18.09.2015 um 17:22 hat Max Reitz geschrieben: >> If there is no BlockDriverState in a BlockBackend or if the tray of th= e >> guest device is open, fail all requests (where that is possible) with >> -ENOMEDIUM. >> >> The reason the status of the guest device is taken into account is >> because once the guest device's tray is opened, any request on the sam= e >> BlockBackend as the guest uses should fail. If the BDS tree is suppose= d >> to be usable even after ejecting it from the guest, a different >> BlockBackend must be used. >> >> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz >> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake >=20 > Do we want to include blk_drain() to make it a no-op instead of > crashing? Yes, we do, so that would be in patch 20. Thanks for catching that. > Also, we're now introducing BlockAIOCBs with a NULL bs with your use of= > abort_aio_request. I haven't carefully reviewed the implications of thi= s > yet, but that should definitely be done before we merge the series. That should be patch 12. Max --1rTGeOATLdoQS43UN3ocNhGmNaqwGcPhH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWAW46AAoJEDuxQgLoOKytD78H/R0WA4oh+JHgKRrXqqEolbop Jc8A/s3xhRTFEf6NDRk4+TGUNS5XrzSIu+20CkZZF1qechDLcqbmY7YQjcgpWsEb pg5+Mo/7ViGo+45V/Igsb9CeOhPYdBx6+F4TP9j+wkq9vC4F2iJB/5FNqcKxdiKZ Xc0SD9JXaSJie4Sj7DEy5IHgKTKY8W4hmA1kZEgU35bzRw0ghfdgIGeKxCuGkTHQ YqOi+94OYAaRJ/QuqZnT2U6ykASdXMT41QkRG5ehQsldAh5yMtGTGuRc4v5oFQjM S1+fIwCF083JW6/wrb64v92Aux8R3hMUcU60/0CZ2LWgUwgxW8E368KQ5v980oU= =hB8T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1rTGeOATLdoQS43UN3ocNhGmNaqwGcPhH--