From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wei Liu Subject: Re: [PATCHv1 net] xen-netback: transition to CLOSED when removing a VIF Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 15:15:23 +0100 Message-ID: <20131007141523.GE28411@zion.uk.xensource.com> References: <1381150519-14557-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com> <20131007134314.GD28411@zion.uk.xensource.com> <5252BDD1.1000301@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Wei Liu , , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Boris Ostrovsky , , Ian Campbell , Paul Durrant To: David Vrabel Return-path: Received: from smtp02.citrix.com ([66.165.176.63]:29426 "EHLO SMTP02.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753031Ab3JGOPZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Oct 2013 10:15:25 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5252BDD1.1000301@citrix.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 02:57:37PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote: > On 07/10/13 14:43, Wei Liu wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 01:55:19PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote: > >> From: David Vrabel > >> > >> If a guest is destroyed without transitioning its frontend to CLOSED, > >> the domain becomes a zombie as netback was not grant unmapping the > >> shared rings. > >> > >> When removing a VIF, transition the backend to CLOSED so the VIF is > >> disconnected if necessary (which will unmap the shared rings etc). > >> > >> This fixes a regression introduced by > >> 279f438e36c0a70b23b86d2090aeec50155034a9 (xen-netback: Don't destroy > >> the netdev until the vif is shut down). > >> > > > > Is this regression solely caused by 279f438e36c or caused by both > > ea732dff5c and 279f438e36c? I ask because you make use of the new state > > machine introduced in ea732dff5c. Or are you simply using the new state > > machine to fix the regression instead of going back to old code? > > I bisected it to 279f438. I'm just using the handy new state machine to > fix it. > Thanks for the explanation. Acked-by: Wei Liu Wei. > David