On 11/04/2015 03:03 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
"Denis V. Lunev" wrote:
On 11/04/2015 12:49 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
void hmp_delvm(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict)
{
const char *name = qdict_get_str(qdict, "name");
if (!bdrv_find_snapshot_bs()) {
monitor_printf(mon, "No b
"Denis V. Lunev" wrote:
> On 11/04/2015 12:49 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> void hmp_delvm(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict)
>> {
>> const char *name = qdict_get_str(qdict, "name");
>>
>> if (!bdrv_find_snapshot_bs()) {
>> monitor_printf(mon, "No block device supports snapshots\n"
On 11/04/2015 12:49 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
void hmp_delvm(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict)
{
const char *name = qdict_get_str(qdict, "name");
if (!bdrv_find_snapshot_bs()) {
monitor_printf(mon, "No block device supports snapshots\n");
return;
}
del_exist
"Denis V. Lunev" wrote:
D> What about this? Is it simple enough for you keeping lock around
> qemu_fopen_bdrv/qemu_fclose as suggested in patch 1?
>
> This is not tested at all, just sent as an idea for a discussion.
>
> Signed-off-by: Denis V. Lunev
> CC: Stefan Hajnoczi
> CC: Juan Quintela
>
What about this? Is it simple enough for you keeping lock around
qemu_fopen_bdrv/qemu_fclose as suggested in patch 1?
This is not tested at all, just sent as an idea for a discussion.
Signed-off-by: Denis V. Lunev
CC: Stefan Hajnoczi
CC: Juan Quintela
---
block.c | 17 ++
