Paolo Bonzini writes:
> On 15/01/2016 18:03, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> Am 05.11.2015 um 13:47 schrieb Markus Armbruster:
>>> Paolo Bonzini writes:
On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts *before* sending
>>DEVICE_DELETED? Like t
Am 15.01.2016 um 18:16 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> On 15/01/2016 18:03, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> Am 05.11.2015 um 13:47 schrieb Markus Armbruster:
>>> Paolo Bonzini writes:
On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts *before* sending
>>D
On 15/01/2016 18:03, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 05.11.2015 um 13:47 schrieb Markus Armbruster:
>> Paolo Bonzini writes:
>>> On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote:
> 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts *before* sending
>DEVICE_DELETED? Like this:
>
> +++ b/hw
Am 05.11.2015 um 13:47 schrieb Markus Armbruster:
> Paolo Bonzini writes:
>> On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote:
1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts *before* sending
DEVICE_DELETED? Like this:
+++ b/hw/core/qdev.c
@@ -1244,6 +1244,9 @@ static vo
On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 04.11.2015 um 19:34 schrieb Markus Armbruster:
>> Paolo Bonzini writes:
>>
>>> Otherwise there is a race where the DEVICE_DELETED event has been sent but
>>> attempts to reuse the ID will fail.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
>>> Signed-of
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> > 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts *before* sending
>> >DEVICE_DELETED? Like this:
>> >
>> > +++ b/hw/core/qdev.c
>> > @@ -1244,6 +1244,9 @@ static void device_unparent(Object *obj)
>> > d
On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote:
> > 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts *before* sending
> >DEVICE_DELETED? Like this:
> >
> > +++ b/hw/core/qdev.c
> > @@ -1244,6 +1244,9 @@ static void device_unparent(Object *obj)
> > dev->parent_bus = NULL;
> >
Am 04.11.2015 um 19:34 schrieb Markus Armbruster:
> Paolo Bonzini writes:
>
>> Otherwise there is a race where the DEVICE_DELETED event has been sent but
>> attempts to reuse the ID will fail.
>>
>> Reported-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
>
> Let's see whether I underst
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> Otherwise there is a race where the DEVICE_DELETED event has been sent but
> attempts to reuse the ID will fail.
>
> Reported-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
Let's see whether I understand this.
> ---
> hw/core/qdev.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed,
On 19/10/2015 13:11, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Otherwise there is a race where the DEVICE_DELETED event has been sent but
> attempts to reuse the ID will fail.
>
> Reported-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
Ping?
Paolo
> ---
> hw/core/qdev.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 ins
Otherwise there is a race where the DEVICE_DELETED event has been sent but
attempts to reuse the ID will fail.
Reported-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
---
hw/core/qdev.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/hw/core/qdev.c b/hw/core/qdev.c
i
11 matches
Mail list logo
