On Monday, November 25, 2024 12:35:05 PM CET Greg Kurz wrote: > On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:23:39 +0100 > Christian Schoenebeck <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Monday, November 25, 2024 9:45:54 AM CET Greg Kurz wrote: > > > On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 17:28:40 +0100 > > > Christian Schoenebeck <[email protected]> wrote: [...] > > > > Probably there are still other 9p request types that should be fixed > > > > for this > > > > use-after-unlink idiom, but this series fixes the mentioned bug report > > > > as > > > > described by reporter, so fair enough to round this up here for now. > > > > > > > > > > When I last worked on that issue I had spotted some other places to fix. > > > > > > Maybe you can find some ideas for future work at : > > > > > > https://github.com/gkurz/qemu/tree/9p-attr-fixes > > > > Was there a reason why you left those patches on the attic? > > > > Lack of cycles
Yeah, that's clear, I more meant in sense of known issues, as I haven't spotted something obvious (above nit level) that would have spoken against pushing those patches. But OK, I also understand the lack of reviewers at that time, etc. /Christian > > What I am seeing is that it was not fixing Tgetattr (i.e. fstat() on guest), > > so it wouldn't have fixed the original reporter's scenario, but they would > > have brought things forward. So just wondering ... > > > > Yeah the fix for Tgetattr was in some other series I had sent at the time but > I did not get much feeback then...
