| Message ID | 4BBC70E3.6010609@siemens.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 01:47:47PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > virtio_blk_req_complete releases the request we dereference again for > bdrv_mon_event. Reorder both calls to fix this. I think Kevin alreday sent a patch to use the local state variable which is still around. Either way looks fine to me.
Am 07.04.2010 13:57, schrieb Christoph Hellwig: > On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 01:47:47PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> virtio_blk_req_complete releases the request we dereference again for >> bdrv_mon_event. Reorder both calls to fix this. > > I think Kevin alreday sent a patch to use the local state variable > which is still around. Either way looks fine to me. Yes, it's the same thing, so I won't pick this up for my block branch even though Jan's fix looks fine, too. Kevin
On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 14:18:26 +0200 Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> wrote: > Am 07.04.2010 13:57, schrieb Christoph Hellwig: > > On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 01:47:47PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> virtio_blk_req_complete releases the request we dereference again for > >> bdrv_mon_event. Reorder both calls to fix this. > > > > I think Kevin alreday sent a patch to use the local state variable > > which is still around. Either way looks fine to me. > > Yes, it's the same thing, so I won't pick this up for my block branch > even though Jan's fix looks fine, too. I also resend Kevin's fix two days ago as part of a git pull, but looks like Anthony is away..
On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 09:32:35 -0300 Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 14:18:26 +0200 > Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Am 07.04.2010 13:57, schrieb Christoph Hellwig: > > > On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 01:47:47PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > >> virtio_blk_req_complete releases the request we dereference again for > > >> bdrv_mon_event. Reorder both calls to fix this. > > > > > > I think Kevin alreday sent a patch to use the local state variable > > > which is still around. Either way looks fine to me. > > > > Yes, it's the same thing, so I won't pick this up for my block branch > > even though Jan's fix looks fine, too. > > I also resend Kevin's fix two days ago as part of a git pull, but > looks like Anthony is away.. A pull request, I mean.
diff --git a/hw/virtio-blk.c b/hw/virtio-blk.c index 9915840..d5e8c79 100644 --- a/hw/virtio-blk.c +++ b/hw/virtio-blk.c @@ -76,8 +76,8 @@ static int virtio_blk_handle_rw_error(VirtIOBlockReq *req, int error, bdrv_mon_event(req->dev->bs, BDRV_ACTION_STOP, is_read); vm_stop(0); } else { - virtio_blk_req_complete(req, VIRTIO_BLK_S_IOERR); bdrv_mon_event(req->dev->bs, BDRV_ACTION_REPORT, is_read); + virtio_blk_req_complete(req, VIRTIO_BLK_S_IOERR); } return 1;
virtio_blk_req_complete releases the request we dereference again for bdrv_mon_event. Reorder both calls to fix this. Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com> --- hw/virtio-blk.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)