On 03/28/2016 05:17 PM, Laine Stump wrote:
On 03/28/2016 07:52 AM, John Ferlan wrote:
While reviewing patch:
http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-March/msg00194.html
I noted that the order of operations during the code path was slightly
different and could cause issues if the reattachment code was called
first. It would seem that resetting the hostdev label and cgroup prior
to reattaching the device to the host would be a better corollary to
the attachment code path which detaches the devices from the host, then
sets the cgroup, then sets the hostdev label.
I've noticed similar issues at other places in the code (teardown not
being the exact mirror image of setup) but didn't touch it because I
didn't want to accidentally introduce regressions.
I wanted to test these patches to verify that the sequence change
doesn't uncover some odd regression, but now I find that hotplug of
type='hostdev' network devices is completely broken (even before
applying your patches), so I'll have to figure out the cause of that
first :-/
I was finally able to try this out (extensively, because I've been
testing the fixes for the other problems I found on top of your
patches). Everything checks out and the logic makes sense, so ACK.
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list