Searched hist:"548 a74c0dbc858edd1a7ee3045b5f2fe710bd8b1" (Results 1 – 2 of 2) sorted by relevance
| /openbmc/qemu/tests/qemu-iotests/tests/ |
| H A D | qsd-jobs.out | diff 548a74c0dbc858edd1a7ee3045b5f2fe710bd8b1 Wed Apr 28 10:17:46 CDT 2021 Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> block: add bdrv_attach_child_common() transaction action
Split out no-perm part of bdrv_root_attach_child() into separate
transaction action. bdrv_root_attach_child() now moves to new
permission update paradigm: first update graph relations then update
permissions.
qsd-jobs test output updated. Seems now permission update goes in
another order. Still, the test comment say that we only want to check
that command doesn't crash, and it's still so.
Error message is a bit misleading as it looks like job was added first.
But actually in new paradigm of graph update we can't distinguish such
things. We should update the error message, but let's not do it now.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-19-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
|
| /openbmc/qemu/ |
| H A D | block.c | diff e878bb1293d2cd0082550b320c3ccf245d0a69d4 Mon May 03 06:05:54 CDT 2021 Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> block: Fix Transaction leak in bdrv_root_attach_child()
The error path needs to call tran_finalize(), too.
Fixes: CID 1452773
Fixes: 548a74c0dbc858edd1a7ee3045b5f2fe710bd8b1
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20210503110555.24001-2-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
diff 548a74c0dbc858edd1a7ee3045b5f2fe710bd8b1 Wed Apr 28 10:17:46 CDT 2021 Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> block: add bdrv_attach_child_common() transaction action
Split out no-perm part of bdrv_root_attach_child() into separate
transaction action. bdrv_root_attach_child() now moves to new
permission update paradigm: first update graph relations then update
permissions.
qsd-jobs test output updated. Seems now permission update goes in
another order. Still, the test comment say that we only want to check
that command doesn't crash, and it's still so.
Error message is a bit misleading as it looks like job was added first.
But actually in new paradigm of graph update we can't distinguish such
things. We should update the error message, but let's not do it now.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-19-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
|