From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37965) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gTolW-0003O4-9Y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Dec 2018 09:00:12 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gTolU-0005Mu-Dk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Dec 2018 09:00:02 -0500 References: <20181129101801.6421-1-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> From: Max Reitz Message-ID: Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 14:59:40 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181129101801.6421-1-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Plhjxc5pXWIfGPPnql7tkr1TMPY7lZ3Bc" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/2] mirror dead-lock List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, jcody@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, dplotnikov@virtuozzo.com, den@openvz.org, qemu-stable@nongnu.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --Plhjxc5pXWIfGPPnql7tkr1TMPY7lZ3Bc From: Max Reitz To: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, jcody@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, dplotnikov@virtuozzo.com, den@openvz.org, qemu-stable@nongnu.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mirror dead-lock References: <20181129101801.6421-1-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> In-Reply-To: <20181129101801.6421-1-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 29.11.18 11:17, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > Hi all! >=20 > v2: add fix:) >=20 > We've faced the following mirror bug: >=20 > Just run mirror on qcow2 image more than 1G, and qemu is in dead lock. So because apparently there is going to be an rc4 anyway (like basically always...), I'd really like to bring this fix into it, unless there are any objections from anyone (though all of you are more than welcome to explicitly agree, too :-)). Do you have any plans for the iotest? Right now, I'd rather just take patch 1 as-is and add the test later, but then again, adding a patch for rc4 without a test is not so nice either, I suppose. Max --Plhjxc5pXWIfGPPnql7tkr1TMPY7lZ3Bc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEkb62CjDbPohX0Rgp9AfbAGHVz0AFAlwFNswACgkQ9AfbAGHV z0Cx1QgAuX8dXPQpkQmQ/lz7IRRhSfeP4ODLud9NzX9z/CHU5XkMNO+NfGmyV9mu JwixfcaU8pVNcJy+nPdYtEMPf+9xroQDbAvMsBjqOqsRWmolZhnek99rC2lc+FBR PzvbU/RSulxaEooP46dqhQLhlvSBHHJ92nekxFwDdo04hdHwmWIcHC25RYMRQHqp +2VGHY/N3B8Ll3r1MzP57bZse7P0Lg1rpfsiSyi2IbzD5TCUNx1JUOVBltyaLh3g QgEJS0MnQsP9nD9EmSXGheaUrNt6Nc0xUdwT8wGRphVJu5hzSTwFUoVcxFvMjOit Bk6FKAKHrHKfTy+fA4YF/sLsUu/uwQ== =apmr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Plhjxc5pXWIfGPPnql7tkr1TMPY7lZ3Bc--