On 3/25/19 11:21 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> -if (!extent->length && !iter.err) {
> -error_setg(&iter.err,
> - "Server did not reply with any status extents");
> +if (!extent->length && !iter.request_ret) {
Hmm, I don't see, what is changed.
On 3/25/19 11:05 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> More to the point, the behavior of qemu for a (structured) error reply
> to NBD_CMD_BLOCK_STATUS with no extent->length was to keep the
> connection alive (both before and after commit 7f86068d) - the
> difference in behavior for this hunk of the patch is o
On 3/25/19 11:21 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> When you fix the first bug (the client setting iter.err on a simple
> error reply from the server because the server's reply wasn't
> structured, to now the client setting just iter.request_ret because it
> successfully parsed an error out of the server's r
On 3/25/19 11:04 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
+++ b/block/nbd-client.c
@@ -718,9 +718,7 @@ static int
nbd_co_receive_blockstatus_reply(NBDClientSession *s,
bool received = false;
assert(!extent->length);
-NBD_FOREACH_REPLY_CHUNK(s, i
25.03.2019 17:44, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 3/25/19 5:12 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>> 23.03.2019 17:24, Eric Blake wrote:
>>> The NBD spec is clear that when structured replies are active, a
>>> simple error reply is acceptable to any command except for
>>> NBD_CMD_READ. However, we wer
On 3/25/19 9:44 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
>>>
>>> @@ -758,9 +756,11 @@ static int
>>> nbd_co_receive_blockstatus_reply(NBDClientSession *s,
>>> payload = NULL;
>>> }
>>>
>>> -if (!extent->length && !iter.err) {
>>> -error_setg(&iter.err,
>>> - "Server did
On 3/25/19 5:12 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> 23.03.2019 17:24, Eric Blake wrote:
>> The NBD spec is clear that when structured replies are active, a
>> simple error reply is acceptable to any command except for
>> NBD_CMD_READ. However, we were mistakenly requiring structured errors
>
23.03.2019 17:24, Eric Blake wrote:
> The NBD spec is clear that when structured replies are active, a
> simple error reply is acceptable to any command except for
> NBD_CMD_READ. However, we were mistakenly requiring structured errors
> for NBD_CMD_BLOCK_STATUS, and hanging up on a server that ga
On 3/23/19 9:40 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 09:24:55AM -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
>> The NBD spec is clear that when structured replies are active, a
>> simple error reply is acceptable to any command except for
>> NBD_CMD_READ. However, we were mistakenly requiring struc
On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 09:24:55AM -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
> The NBD spec is clear that when structured replies are active, a
> simple error reply is acceptable to any command except for
> NBD_CMD_READ. However, we were mistakenly requiring structured errors
> for NBD_CMD_BLOCK_STATUS, and hangin
The NBD spec is clear that when structured replies are active, a
simple error reply is acceptable to any command except for
NBD_CMD_READ. However, we were mistakenly requiring structured errors
for NBD_CMD_BLOCK_STATUS, and hanging up on a server that gave a
simple error (since qemu does not behav
11 matches
Mail list logo
