[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenbus: don't bail early from xenbus_dev_request_and_reply()
On 07/07/16 13:23, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 07.07.16 at 14:17, <david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 07/07/16 13:09, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 07.07.16 at 13:36, <david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On 07/07/16 08:32, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> We must not skip the transaction_end() call for a failed >>>>> XS_TRANSACTION_START. The removed code fragment got introduced by >>>>> commit 027bd7e899 ("xen/xenbus: Avoid synchronous wait on XenBus >>>>> stalling shutdown/restart") without its description really indicating >>>>> why it was added (and hence I can't identify whether a more complex >>>>> change might be needed here). >>>> >>>> If sending the XS_TRANSACTION_END message failed, then the transaction >>>> is still open and transaction_end() should not be called. >>>> >>>> However, if sending an XS_TRANSACTION_START failed, then >>>> transaction_end() should be called. >>>> >>>> So, yes a more complex fix is needed here. >>> >>> Well, both of the things you name are what happens with the patch >>> in place. So if those two conditions are all that needs to be satisfied, >>> then no more complex change is needed afaict (and was the behavior >>> before the cross referenced commit) - the question really is whether >>> that other commit meant to deal with something _beyond_ those two >>> things. >> >> You call transaction_end() if msg->type == XS_TRANSACTION_END, even if >> xb_write() returned an error. > > When xb_write() returns an error, msg->type gets set to XS_ERROR. So? if ((msg->type == XS_TRANSACTION_END) || (...)) transaction_end(); We don't check msg->type for XS_TRANSACTION_END messages. David _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |