On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:34:33 -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > On 05/22/2012 07:34 AM, Jiri Denemark wrote: > > This reverts commit b1e374a7ac56927cfe62435179bf0bba1e08b372, which was > > rather bad since I failed to consider all sides of the issue. Thus, the > > reverted patch actually breaks more than what it fixes and clients > > (which may even be libvirtd during p2p migrations) will likely end up > > with a corrupted dispatch queue. > > --- > > > > I will send proper replacement for the reverted patch later once I'm convinced > > it's correct (more than I was convinced the original one was correct) :-P > > > > src/rpc/virnetclient.c | 21 ++++++++++++--------- > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > ACK for being a straight revert, although I would hold off pushing this > until the cleaner replacement has been reviewed and can be pushed at the > same time. > > Just so I understand, how was this patch causing new problems? The replacement patch will need some time to settle down and I'd rather push this revert soon. Eric agreed on irc. Thus I made the comment better in describing what I failed to consider in the original patch and pushed this revert. Jirka -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list