Searched hist:"81 e254dc" (Results 1 – 5 of 5) sorted by relevance
| /qemu/include/block/ |
| H A D | blockjob.h | 81e254dc Mon Apr 18 09:36:38 GMT 2016 Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> blockjob: Don't set iostatus of target
When block job errors were introduced, we assigned the iostatus of the
target BDS "just in case". The field has never been accessible for the
user because the target isn't listed in query-block.
Before we can allow the user to have a second BlockBackend on the
target, we need to clean this up. If anything, we would want to set the
iostatus for the internal BB of the job (which we can always do later),
but certainly not for a separate BB which the job doesn't even use.
As a nice side effect, this gets us rid of another bs->blk use.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
|
| /qemu/block/ |
| H A D | stream.c | 81e254dc Mon Apr 18 09:36:38 GMT 2016 Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> blockjob: Don't set iostatus of target
When block job errors were introduced, we assigned the iostatus of the
target BDS "just in case". The field has never been accessible for the
user because the target isn't listed in query-block.
Before we can allow the user to have a second BlockBackend on the
target, we need to clean this up. If anything, we would want to set the
iostatus for the internal BB of the job (which we can always do later),
but certainly not for a separate BB which the job doesn't even use.
As a nice side effect, this gets us rid of another bs->blk use.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | backup.c | 81e254dc Mon Apr 18 09:36:38 GMT 2016 Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> blockjob: Don't set iostatus of target
When block job errors were introduced, we assigned the iostatus of the
target BDS "just in case". The field has never been accessible for the
user because the target isn't listed in query-block.
Before we can allow the user to have a second BlockBackend on the
target, we need to clean this up. If anything, we would want to set the
iostatus for the internal BB of the job (which we can always do later),
but certainly not for a separate BB which the job doesn't even use.
As a nice side effect, this gets us rid of another bs->blk use.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
|
| H A D | mirror.c | 81e254dc Mon Apr 18 09:36:38 GMT 2016 Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> blockjob: Don't set iostatus of target
When block job errors were introduced, we assigned the iostatus of the
target BDS "just in case". The field has never been accessible for the
user because the target isn't listed in query-block.
Before we can allow the user to have a second BlockBackend on the
target, we need to clean this up. If anything, we would want to set the
iostatus for the internal BB of the job (which we can always do later),
but certainly not for a separate BB which the job doesn't even use.
As a nice side effect, this gets us rid of another bs->blk use.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
|
| /qemu/ |
| H A D | blockjob.c | 81e254dc Mon Apr 18 09:36:38 GMT 2016 Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> blockjob: Don't set iostatus of target
When block job errors were introduced, we assigned the iostatus of the
target BDS "just in case". The field has never been accessible for the
user because the target isn't listed in query-block.
Before we can allow the user to have a second BlockBackend on the
target, we need to clean this up. If anything, we would want to set the
iostatus for the internal BB of the job (which we can always do later),
but certainly not for a separate BB which the job doesn't even use.
As a nice side effect, this gets us rid of another bs->blk use.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
|