qemu-block
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v9 19/21] blockjob: protect iostatus field in BlockJob struct


From: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 19/21] blockjob: protect iostatus field in BlockJob struct
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 15:07:31 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.0


Am 11/07/2022 um 16:51 schrieb Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy:
> On 7/6/22 23:15, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
>> iostatus is the only field (together with .job) that needs
>> protection using the job mutex.
>>
>> It is set in the main loop (GLOBAL_STATE functions) but read
>> in I/O code (block_job_error_action).
>>
>> In order to protect it, change block_job_iostatus_set_err
>> to block_job_iostatus_set_err_locked(), always called under
>> job lock.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
> 
> Seems, that (and previous) patch should go before 15.

Why?

> 
>> ---
>>   blockjob.c | 5 +++--
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/blockjob.c b/blockjob.c
>> index a2559b97a7..893c8ff08e 100644
>> --- a/blockjob.c
>> +++ b/blockjob.c
>> @@ -367,7 +367,8 @@ BlockJobInfo *block_job_query(BlockJob *job, Error
>> **errp)
>>       return block_job_query_locked(job, errp);
>>   }
>>   -static void block_job_iostatus_set_err(BlockJob *job, int error)
>> +/* Called with job lock held */
>> +static void block_job_iostatus_set_err_locked(BlockJob *job, int error)
>>   {
>>       if (job->iostatus == BLOCK_DEVICE_IO_STATUS_OK) {
>>           job->iostatus = error == ENOSPC ?
>> BLOCK_DEVICE_IO_STATUS_NOSPACE :
>> @@ -586,8 +587,8 @@ BlockErrorAction block_job_error_action(BlockJob
>> *job, BlockdevOnError on_err,
>>                    */
>>                   job->job.user_paused = true;
>>               }
>> +            block_job_iostatus_set_err_locked(job, error);
>>           }
>> -        block_job_iostatus_set_err(job, error);
>>       }
>>       return action;
>>   }
> 
> 




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]