On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 11:00:17AM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 07.12.2009 15:16, schrieb Richard W.M. Jones:
> > Here's a second go at this patch. The only change is that we add a
> > second parameter (backinglock=none|shared|exclusive) which can be used
> > to control locking on the first level
Am 07.12.2009 15:16, schrieb Richard W.M. Jones:
> Here's a second go at this patch. The only change is that we add a
> second parameter (backinglock=none|shared|exclusive) which can be used
> to control locking on the first level (only) of backing disk.
And what about the backing file of the bac
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Here's a second go at this patch. The only change is that we add a
second parameter (backinglock=none|shared|exclusive) which can be used
to control locking on the first level (only) of backing disk.
Dan Berrange convinced me there was a case to retain a distinct share
Here's a second go at this patch. The only change is that we add a
second parameter (backinglock=none|shared|exclusive) which can be used
to control locking on the first level (only) of backing disk.
Dan Berrange convinced me there was a case to retain a distinct shared
locking type.
For any qem
