On 11/06/2018 01:28 PM, John Ferlan wrote: > > > On 11/6/18 4:38 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote: >> On 11/01/2018 05:04 PM, John Ferlan wrote: >>> Checking and setting the priv->allowReboot can be done before we start >>> processing the job. A subsequent patch will make use of the value to >>> make decisions in the error label, so we need to have it set properly. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> src/qemu/qemu_process.c | 8 ++++---- >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c >>> index 9cf971808c..5232f761af 100644 >>> --- a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c >>> +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c >>> @@ -7767,6 +7767,10 @@ qemuProcessReconnect(void *opaque) >>> cfg = virQEMUDriverGetConfig(driver); >>> priv = obj->privateData; >>> >>> + /* If we are connecting to a guest started by old libvirt there is no >>> + * allowReboot in status XML and we need to initialize it. */ >>> + qemuProcessPrepareAllowReboot(obj); >> >> I'm not quite sure why this happens outside of job. It doesn't look like >> it has to. >> > > Is there a reason in your opinion it needs to occur inside a job? It is > a void function. The type of the return value doesn't matter. qemuProcessPrepareAllowReboot() changes private data and that is potentially dangerous if done outside modify job (even though the @vm is locked at this point so I guess it is not that dangerous after all). > > It's moved to prior to the first "goto error" because of patch3 which > would call qemuDomainIsUsingNoShutdown which checks priv->allowReboot > which is possibly set in *AllowReboot. Without that move, the code would > need to be reworked, which is fine, but understanding the reason why I > wrote things the way I did is important, IMO. I can add a comment to > "warn" the next person trying to move it that the error: logic uses the > ->allowReboot value. > > The allowReboot alteration has nothing to do with a job AFAICT and > whether on error: there is a job or not. Perhaps no different to what > qemuDomainObjRestoreJob is doing by using @priv fields for @oldjob. Yeah, but RestoreJob is special - we can't call it after job is acquired, we want to save currently running job to a temp variable so that we can start a new job. > > Although looking at and quickly thinking about the code now, I wonder if > the virQEMUDriverGetCapabilities and goto error should be inside a job > too since error would then call qemuProcessStop without being in a job. Ooops, yes. > > If this is dropped then logic in patch3 needs to be altered in order to > account for jobStarted = true... I think that got too messy when I first > thought about it. Michal -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
