Paolo Bonzini writes:
> In short, this patch gets rid of blockdev_mark_auto_del and
> blockdev_auto_del.
>
> With these patches, it is possible to create a new -drive with the same
> id as soon as the DEVICE_DELETED event is delivered (which equals to
> unrealize).
>
> I'm sorry I'm not able to e
Kevin Wolf writes:
> Am 09.03.2016 um 13:20 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben:
>> On 22/02/2016 15:39, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> > In short, this patch gets rid of blockdev_mark_auto_del and
>> > blockdev_auto_del.
>> >
>> > With these patches, it is possible to create a new -drive with the same
>> >
Am 09.03.2016 um 13:20 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben:
> On 22/02/2016 15:39, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > In short, this patch gets rid of blockdev_mark_auto_del and
> > blockdev_auto_del.
> >
> > With these patches, it is possible to create a new -drive with the same
> > id as soon as the DEVICE_DELE
On 22/02/2016 15:39, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> In short, this patch gets rid of blockdev_mark_auto_del and
> blockdev_auto_del.
>
> With these patches, it is possible to create a new -drive with the same
> id as soon as the DEVICE_DELETED event is delivered (which equals to
> unrealize).
>
> I'm s
In short, this patch gets rid of blockdev_mark_auto_del and
blockdev_auto_del.
With these patches, it is possible to create a new -drive with the same
id as soon as the DEVICE_DELETED event is delivered (which equals to
unrealize).
I'm sorry I'm not able to explain the history (and probably do no