On Wed, 2015-03-18 at 11:52 -0600, Jim Fehlig wrote: > Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 17:34 +0000, Wei Liu wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 09:30:58AM -0600, Jim Fehlig wrote: > >> > >>> From: Ian Jackson <ian.jack...@eu.citrix.com> > >>> > >>> Unlock the userdata before we actually call xc_domain_destroy. This > >>> leaves open the possibility that other libxl callers will see the > >>> half-destroyed domain (with no devices, paused), but this is fine. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jack...@eu.citrix.com> > >>> CC: Wei Liu <wei.l...@citrix.com> > >>> Reviewed-by: Jim Fehlig <jfeh...@suse.com> > >>> Tested-by: Jim Fehlig <jfeh...@suse.com> > >>> > >> Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.l...@citrix.com> > >> > > > > Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@citrix.com> > > > > I'm not sure if this is safe/sensible to apply without the preceding > > patch which I had a comment on. > > > > It is not so sensible without the subsequent patch 3/3. This patch is > not related to the preceding patch 1/3.
Thanks, I applied 1/3 and then I decided I may as well apply 2/3 as well, there's no harm and it would be interesting to see how the locking change holds up. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
