On 04/16/2014 05:19 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 07:48:52PM -0400, John Ferlan wrote: <...snip...> > > I'm afraid I just don't think this change is safe - I think it will > cause volumes to go missing from pools as we had before we used > udevadm settle. > OK - not a problem. This'll be one of those cannot fix with explanation type bugs. Do you believe it's "reasonable" or "good" to at least have some sort of message if the udevadm settle timeout is triggered? It is notable that if the two minute timeout is triggered, then the same problem exists vis-a-vis having or not having LUNs appear. Secondary to that - the iSCSI code will end up going through the settle code twice - once during it's own FindLU's in the GetHostNumber call during RefreshPool and then once because it calls the SCSI code's FindLU's call. Additionally, for a SCSI pool start there are two calls to settle - once at the end of PoolStart (createVport() after VPORT_CREATE) and then again through the RefreshPool logic during FindLU. Do you believe both are necessary or should some rework be done? Tks, John -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list