From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57138) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1X0VAD-0002xe-M1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 08:22:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1X0VA4-0001fw-VO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 08:21:57 -0400 Received: from oxygen.pond.sub.org ([144.76.244.19]:44545) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1X0VA4-0001fq-QB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 08:21:48 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: <1403073840-32603-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1403073840-32603-22-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <87simrd6lu.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <53AC3F09.2070705@redhat.com> <87tx77aciq.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 14:21:46 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87tx77aciq.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> (Markus Armbruster's message of "Thu, 26 Jun 2014 17:58:21 +0200") Message-ID: <871tuawnj9.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2.1 21/36] qapi event: convert BLOCK_IO_ERROR and BLOCK_JOB_ERROR List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: lcapitulino@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, wenchaoqemu@gmail.com Markus Armbruster writes: > Paolo Bonzini writes: > >> Il 26/06/2014 17:37, Markus Armbruster ha scritto: >>> Paolo Bonzini writes: >>>=20 >>>> From: Wenchao Xia >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Wenchao Xia >>>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini >>>=20 >>> This broke tests/qemu-iotests/041. Apparently, the BLOCK_JOB_ERROR >>> event changed from >>>=20 >>> {'timestamp': {'seconds': 1403796871, 'microseconds': 446502}, >>> 'data': {'device': 'drive0', >> >> - bdrv_emit_qmp_error_event(job->bs, QEVENT_BLOCK_JOB_ERROR, action, >> is_read); >> + qapi_event_send_block_job_error(bdrv_get_device_name(bs), >> >> Should have been job->bs. > > Will you post a patch, or would you like me to do that? > >>> 'action': 'ignore', >>> 'operation': 'write'}, >>> 'event': 'BLOCK_JOB_ERROR'} >>>=20 >>> to >>>=20 >>> {'timestamp': {'seconds': 1403796674, 'microseconds': 63271}, >>> 'data': {'device': '', >>> 'action': 'report', >> >> I suppose ignore vs. report is just from pasting two different sections? > > Could well be; it's almost time for Fu=C3=9Fball & Bier ;) Nope, it's a genuine error in the patch. Working on a fix.