Kevin Wolf writes:
> Am 30.09.2014 um 12:56 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
>> Kevin Wolf writes:
[...]
>> > Taking back my R-b: You tricked us, this assertion doesn't hold true.
>> > Easy to reproduce by taking a live snapshot. qemu-iotests case 052
>> > catches it. Didn't you run it?
>>
>>
Am 30.09.2014 um 12:56 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> Kevin Wolf writes:
>
> > Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> >> The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
> >> reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
> >> a weak
Kevin Wolf writes:
> Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
>> The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
>> reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
>> a weak one.
>>
>> Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a BlockBac
Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
> reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
> a weak one.
>
> Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a BlockBackend with its
> BlockDriverS
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:36:03PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Do we have a KVM Forum block layer agenda yet? I think this thread could
> already contain a few topics to discuss there.
Being the guy who constantly bring back painfull issues
(Block filters, Block Backend) on the table I think we sho
Kevin Wolf writes:
> Am 23.09.2014 um 14:52 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
>> Kevin Wolf writes:
>>
>> > Am 22.09.2014 um 18:34 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
>> >> Kevin Wolf writes:
>> >>
>> >> > Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
>> >> >> diff --git a/include
Am 23.09.2014 um 14:52 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> Kevin Wolf writes:
>
> > Am 22.09.2014 um 18:34 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> >> Kevin Wolf writes:
> >>
> >> > Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> >> >> diff --git a/include/block/block_int.h b/include/b
Kevin Wolf writes:
> Am 22.09.2014 um 18:34 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
>> Kevin Wolf writes:
>>
>> > Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
>> >> diff --git a/include/block/block_int.h b/include/block/block_int.h
>> >> index 8d86a6c..14e0b7c 100644
>> >> --- a/include
Am 22.09.2014 um 18:34 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> Kevin Wolf writes:
>
> > Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> >> diff --git a/include/block/block_int.h b/include/block/block_int.h
> >> index 8d86a6c..14e0b7c 100644
> >> --- a/include/block/block_int.h
> >> +++ b
Kevin Wolf writes:
> Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
>> The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
>> reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
>> a weak one.
>>
>> Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a BlockBac
Am 16.09.2014 um 20:12 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
> reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
> a weak one.
>
> Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a BlockBackend with its
> BlockDriverS
On 16.09.2014 20:12, Markus Armbruster wrote:
The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
a weak one.
Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a BlockBackend with its
BlockDriverState. Callers have to
The pointer from BlockBackend to BlockDriverState is a strong
reference, managed with bdrv_ref() / bdrv_unref(), the back-pointer is
a weak one.
Convenience function blk_new_with_bs() creates a BlockBackend with its
BlockDriverState. Callers have to unref both. The commit after next
will relieve
13 matches
Mail list logo