This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [GIT PULL] for-2.6.32/bug-fixes

>>> On 17.05.11 at 17:57, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > No attaching of data to the barrier.
>> Sure, this direction we agree about. But your change is enforcing
>> it the other way around (if barrier then no data), which wasn't the
>> case so far.
> OK, even if the code that actually does the bio submission does
> not attach any data to the bio? The end result is the same - no
> data with barriers.

My problem is that I can't see where attaching data would be
skipped. The only thing I see is the BUG_ON() you pointed at
earlier, checking that if there is no data, then this must be a
barrier request.

>> >> Additionally, looking at the check in vbd_translate(), wouldn't you
>> >> think there ought to be overflow checking for the addition, too?
>> > 
>> > Sure, could add that in. Albeit it seems incorrect to do it in that
>> > function. It checks to see if the sector is correct, and -1 is definitly
>> > wrong.
>> Hmm, depends on your perspective - I'd say that any sector_number
>> is valid when nr_sects is zero.
> I concur. The value that is passed by the frontend is not zero. It is -1.

Oh, you say both sector_number and nr_sects are -1? Looking
again... No, that can't be the case, the value starts out at zero
in dispatch_rw_block_io().


Xen-devel mailing list