| Message ID | 1488286469-9381-29-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Tue 28 Feb 2017 01:54:13 PM CET, Kevin Wolf wrote: > bdrv_append() cares about isolation of the node that it modifies, but > not about activity in some subtree below it. Instead of using the > recursive bdrv_requests_pending(), directly check bs->in_flight, which > considers only the node in question. > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> > Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> > --- > block.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/block.c b/block.c > index 9e538a5..5189c7c 100644 > --- a/block.c > +++ b/block.c > @@ -2897,8 +2897,8 @@ static void change_parent_backing_link(BlockDriverState *from, > */ > void bdrv_append(BlockDriverState *bs_new, BlockDriverState *bs_top) > { > - assert(!bdrv_requests_pending(bs_top)); > - assert(!bdrv_requests_pending(bs_new)); > + assert(!atomic_read(&bs_top->in_flight)); > + assert(!atomic_read(&bs_new->in_flight)); > > bdrv_ref(bs_top); I don't know if there's still any maintenance on the v2.8.x branch, but I can make v2.8.1.1 crash easily because of this failing assertion. Applying this patch fixes the issue. I can provide more details if needed. Regards, Berto
diff --git a/block.c b/block.c index 9e538a5..5189c7c 100644 --- a/block.c +++ b/block.c @@ -2897,8 +2897,8 @@ static void change_parent_backing_link(BlockDriverState *from, */ void bdrv_append(BlockDriverState *bs_new, BlockDriverState *bs_top) { - assert(!bdrv_requests_pending(bs_top)); - assert(!bdrv_requests_pending(bs_new)); + assert(!atomic_read(&bs_top->in_flight)); + assert(!atomic_read(&bs_new->in_flight)); bdrv_ref(bs_top);