On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 17:22 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Stefano Stabellini writes ("[PATCH v2 for-4.6] libxl: handle read-only
> drives with qemu-xen"):
> > The current libxl code doesn't deal with read-only drives at all.
> >
> > Upstream QEMU and qemu-xen only support read-only cdrom drives: mak
On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 18:58 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 for-4.6] libxl: handle read-only
> drives with qemu-xen"):
> > So shall we go ahead with this for 4.6 or is there more
> > testing/discussion/whatever needed?
>
> I think we can commit it to 4.6. I would l
Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 for-4.6] libxl: handle read-only drives
with qemu-xen"):
> So shall we go ahead with this for 4.6 or is there more
> testing/discussion/whatever needed?
I think we can commit it to 4.6. I would like to issue the actual
advisory though.
I see no-one commented.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:49:41PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
[...]
> > > So shall we go ahead with this for 4.6 or is there more
> > > testing/discussion/whatever needed?
> > >
> >
> > Yes, of course.
>
> "Yes, of course, go ahead" or "Yes, of course, more
> testing/discusion/whatever is needed
On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 12:35 +0100, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:13:20PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 14:54 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > M A Young writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 for-4.6] libxl: handle read-only
> > > drives
> > > with qemu-xen"):
> > > > On Tue, 15
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:13:20PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 14:54 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > M A Young writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 for-4.6] libxl: handle read-only drives
> > with qemu-xen"):
> > > On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Is ERROR_INVAL the right
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 14:54 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > M A Young writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 for-4.6] libxl: handle read-only drives
> > with qemu-xen"):
> > > On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Is ERROR_INVAL the right error to return? I
On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 14:54 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> M A Young writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 for-4.6] libxl: handle read-only drives
> with qemu-xen"):
> > On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Is ERROR_INVAL the right error to return? I get
> >
> > libxl_dm.c: In function 'libxl__build_d
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 06:53:53PM +0100, M A Young wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >
> > > } else {
> > > +if (!disks[i].readwrite) {
> > > +LIBXL__LOG(ctx, LIBXL__LOG_ERROR, "qem
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 06:53:53PM +0100, M A Young wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>
> > } else {
> > +if (!disks[i].readwrite) {
> > +LIBXL__LOG(ctx, LIBXL__LOG_ERROR, "qemu-xen doesn't
> > support read-only disk drivers")
M A Young writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 for-4.6] libxl: handle read-only drives with
qemu-xen"):
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Is ERROR_INVAL the right error to return? I get
>
> libxl_dm.c: In function 'libxl__build_device_model_args_new':
> libxl_dm.c:807:28: error: return makes p
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> } else {
> +if (!disks[i].readwrite) {
> +LIBXL__LOG(ctx, LIBXL__LOG_ERROR, "qemu-xen doesn't
> support read-only disk drivers");
> +return ERROR_INVAL;
> +}
> +
Stefano Stabellini writes ("[PATCH v2 for-4.6] libxl: handle read-only drives
with qemu-xen"):
> The current libxl code doesn't deal with read-only drives at all.
>
> Upstream QEMU and qemu-xen only support read-only cdrom drives: make
> sure to specify "readonly=on" for cdrom drives and return e
13 matches
Mail list logo
