Am 15.11.2012 um 16:54 schrieb Paolo Bonzini :
> Il 15/11/2012 15:57, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
>> I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code here.
>> It is much nicer if all code is async.
>
> bdrv_open is generally synchronous, so I think Peter's patch is ok.
would`t it be bett
Il 16/11/2012 18:38, Peter Lieven ha scritto:
> Am 16.11.2012 11:38, schrieb Kevin Wolf:
>> Am 15.11.2012 17:37, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
>>> Il 15/11/2012 17:13, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Paolo Bonzini
wrote:
> Il 15/11/2012 15:57, ronnie sahlberg ha
Am 16.11.2012 11:38, schrieb Kevin Wolf:
Am 15.11.2012 17:37, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
Il 15/11/2012 17:13, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 15/11/2012 15:57, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code
Am 15.11.2012 17:37, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> Il 15/11/2012 17:13, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Il 15/11/2012 15:57, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code here.
It is much nicer if a
Am 16.11.2012 08:44, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
Il 15/11/2012 19:28, Peter Lieven ha scritto:
I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code here.
It is much nicer if all code is async.
bdrv_open is generally synchronous, so I think Peter's patch is ok.
if all is sync wouldn't it be best
Il 15/11/2012 19:28, Peter Lieven ha scritto:
>>> >> I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code here.
>>> >> It is much nicer if all code is async.
>> >
>> > bdrv_open is generally synchronous, so I think Peter's patch is ok.
> if all is sync wouldn't it be best to have all code in isc
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 15/11/2012 15:57, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
>> I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code here.
>> It is much nicer if all code is async.
>
> bdrv_open is generally synchronous, so I think Peter's patch is ok.
if all is sync wouldn't it be best to have all
Il 15/11/2012 17:13, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 15/11/2012 15:57, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
>>> I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code here.
>>> It is much nicer if all code is async.
>>
>> bdrv_open is generally syn
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 15/11/2012 15:57, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
>> I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code here.
>> It is much nicer if all code is async.
>
> bdrv_open is generally synchronous, so I think Peter's patch is ok.
I was thinkin
Il 15/11/2012 15:57, ronnie sahlberg ha scritto:
> I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code here.
> It is much nicer if all code is async.
bdrv_open is generally synchronous, so I think Peter's patch is ok.
Paolo
> Is it possible to add a timeout instead that would break out if th
Am 15.11.2012 um 15:57 schrieb ronnie sahlberg :
> I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code here.
> It is much nicer if all code is async.
Of course, but its just the initial login after which qemu should exit if it
fails.
>
> Is it possible to add a timeout instead that would
I dont know if we should switch to use synchronous code here.
It is much nicer if all code is async.
Is it possible to add a timeout instead that would break out if the
connect/login has not completed within a certain amount of time?
regards
ronnie sahlberg
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:50 AM, Pete
If the connection is interrupted before the first login is successfully
completed qemu-kvm is waiting forever in qemu_aio_wait().
This is fixed by performing an sync login to the target. If the
connection breaks after the first successful login errors are
handled internally by libiscsi.
Signed-o
13 matches
Mail list logo
