On 08/04/2017 09:13, John Snow wrote:
>
>
> On 03/23/2017 01:39 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
>
> What was the bad design that required you to fix the previous test? :)
It was actually patch 9 that had the bug, I'll reorder to match the
commit message.
Paolo
>> ---
>> blockjob.c | 11 ++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/blockjob.c b/blockjob.c
>> index c9cb5b1..093962b 100644
>> --- a/blockjob.c
>> +++ b/blockjob.c
>> @@ -373,6 +373,12 @@ static void block_job_completed_single(BlockJob *job)
>> block_job_unref(job);
>> }
>>
>> +static void block_job_cancel_async(BlockJob *job)
>> +{
>> + job->cancelled = true;
>> + block_job_iostatus_reset(job);
>> +}
>> +
>> static void block_job_completed_txn_abort(BlockJob *job)
>> {
>> AioContext *ctx;
>> @@ -397,7 +403,7 @@ static void block_job_completed_txn_abort(BlockJob *job)
>> * them; this job, however, may or may not be cancelled,
>> depending
>> * on the caller, so leave it. */
>> if (other_job != job) {
>> - other_job->cancelled = true;
>> + block_job_cancel_async(other_job);
>
> Adds an ioreset here, which I think is probably fine...
>
>> }
>> continue;
>> }
>> @@ -489,8 +495,7 @@ void block_job_user_resume(BlockJob *job)
>> void block_job_cancel(BlockJob *job)
>> {
>> if (block_job_started(job)) {
>> - job->cancelled = true;
>> - block_job_iostatus_reset(job);
>> + block_job_cancel_async(job);
>> block_job_enter(job);
>> } else {
>> block_job_completed(job, -ECANCELED);
>>
>
> Reviewed-by: John Snow <js...@redhat.com>
>
