From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: George Dunlap Subject: Re: xl cannot cd-eject an initialy inserted iso in staging-4.2 Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 11:51:42 +0000 Message-ID: <53219BCE.2070005@eu.citrix.com> References: <531934193fe9_@_imoxion.com> <531F28310200007800122D2D@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <531F222A.8070709@eu.citrix.com> <1394695234.15705.7.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1394695234.15705.7.camel@localhost> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jungnam Lee Cc: Ian Jackson , Jan Beulich , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 03/13/2014 07:20 AM, Jungnam Lee wrote: > 2014-03-11, 14:48 +0000, George Dunlap: >> On 03/11/2014 02:13 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 11.03.14 at 13:26, George Dunlap wrote: >>>> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 2:47 AM, Jungnam Lee wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all. >>>>> >>>>> I created VM with a cdrom device with an iso file, and ejecting works fine >>>>> in the master branch. >>>>> >>>>> But if I do this with staging-4.2, I got an error below. >>>>> >>>>> libxl: debug: libxl.c:2137:libxl_cdrom_insert: ao 0x1425990: create: >>>>> how=(nil) callback=(nil) poller=0x14259f0 >>>>> >>>>> libxl: debug: libxl_device.c:245:libxl__device_disk_set_backend: Disk >>>>> vdev=hdc spec.backend=phy >>>>> >>>>> libxl: debug: libxl_device.c:191:disk_try_backend: Disk vdev=hdc, backend >>>>> phy unsuitable as phys path not a block device >>>>> >>>>> libxl: error: libxl_device.c:285:libxl__device_disk_set_backend: no >>>>> suitable backend for disk hdc. >>>>> >>>> Does the patch from this mail help? >>>> >>>> I had tried to flag it as a candidate for backport at the time, but I >>>> failed to CC Jan. >>> And you really would have needed to Cc IanJ, as he's who takes >>> care of tools side backports. >> Ah, right -- well I did CC IanJ; not in the original message, but when I >> replied saying "This should probably be backported". >> >> (I'm not 100% sure it wasn't backported: a quick search through the git >> history didn't turn up anything, but I may have missed it.) >> > it seems cherry-picking 0166217103e18368424fbd5ffff01c1ea50d0b17 fixes > this issue. Is this right? Ah, right -- I think that's the one I was looking for actually. I forgot that Wei had written it, not me. -George