From: Joe Jin Subject: Re: [PATCH resubmit] xen-blkfront: Don't send closing notification to backend in blkfront_closing() Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:58:50 +0800 Message-ID: <4E1FF33A.8090101@oracle.com> References: <4E1CEB34.5090907@oracle.com> <1310631209.634.444.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <4E1EAEE9.80605@oracle.com> <1310634779.634.480.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1310634779.634.480.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: stable-bounces@linux.kernel.org Errors-To: stable-bounces@linux.kernel.org To: Ian Campbell Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Jens Axboe , Greg Marsden , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "annie.li@oracle.com" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Kurt C Hackel , "stable@kernel.org" , Daniel Stodden List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 07/14/11 17:12, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 09:55 +0100, Joe Jin wrote: >> On 07/14/11 16:13, Ian Campbell wrote: >>> On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 01:47 +0100, Joe Jin wrote: > >>> >>> I'm wondering if we might not be better off deferring the disconnect on >>> the backend side until the frontend enters XenbusStateClosed instead of >>> doing it in closing. >> >> Yes this fix from backend side works too, also this looks reasonable than >> fix in frontend. > > I guess there is either a missing "more" or "less" in that sentence ;-) > > The nice thing about a backend fix is that you don't need to go round > propagating the fix into distros etc and updating existing deployed > guests (not to mention non-Linux frontends). Indeed ;) > > I actually thought blkback had something like this already in older > "classic" Xen kernels but it seems like the patch never made it out of > the XCP patch queue :-(. See > http://xenbits.xen.org/hg/XCP/linux-2.6.32.pq.hg/file/tip/CA-7672-blkback-shutdown.patch > (which appears to also incorporate a toolstack directed graceful > shutdown of some sort as well as deferring the device close). > > Daniel, do you know of any plans to extricate that stuff from the XCP > patch queue for upstream? Are there any other patches (e.g. incremental > fixes) in that pq which should go along with it? Looking forward push this patch to upstream! Joe _______________________________________________ stable mailing list stable@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable