On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 13:01:39 -0600
Alex Williamson wrote:
> So apparently I assumed too much about the existing balloon inhibitor
> use case, it's clearly not as general as the interface would lead one
> to believe. The immediate solution is probably to make a postcopy
> specific wrapper around
On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 11:47:09 -0600
Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 17:56:12 +0200
> Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
> > This breaks qemu-io test for me.
> >
> > #0 0x03ff98f3e2d4 in raise () at /lib64/libc.so.6
> > #1 0x03ff98f239a8 in abort () at /lib64/libc.so.6
> > #2
On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 17:56:12 +0200
Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> This breaks qemu-io test for me.
>
> #0 0x03ff98f3e2d4 in raise () at /lib64/libc.so.6
> #1 0x03ff98f239a8 in abort () at /lib64/libc.so.6
> #2 0x03ff98f3632e in __assert_fail_base () at /lib64/libc.so.6
> #3 0x000
This breaks qemu-io test for me.
#0 0x03ff98f3e2d4 in raise () at /lib64/libc.so.6
#1 0x03ff98f239a8 in abort () at /lib64/libc.so.6
#2 0x03ff98f3632e in __assert_fail_base () at /lib64/libc.so.6
#3 0x03ff98f363ac in () at /lib64/libc.so.6
#4 0x0108301a in qemu_balloo
A simple true/false internal state does not allow multiple users. Fix
this within the existing interface by converting to a counter, so long
as the counter is elevated, ballooning is inhibited.
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand
Reviewed-by: Peter Xu
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck
Signed-off-by: Alex
