Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

Paolo Bonzini writes: > On 15/01/2016 18:03, Andreas Färber wrote: >> Am 05.11.2015 um 13:47 schrieb Markus Armbruster: >>> Paolo Bonzini writes: On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote: >> 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

Am 05.11.2015 um 13:47 schrieb Markus Armbruster: > Paolo Bonzini writes: >> On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote: 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts *before* sending DEVICE_DELETED? Like this: +++ b/hw/core/qdev.c @@

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

Am 15.01.2016 um 18:16 schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > On 15/01/2016 18:03, Andreas Färber wrote: >> Am 05.11.2015 um 13:47 schrieb Markus Armbruster: >>> Paolo Bonzini writes: On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote: >> 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

On 15/01/2016 18:03, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 05.11.2015 um 13:47 schrieb Markus Armbruster: >> Paolo Bonzini writes: >>> On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote: > 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts *before* sending >DEVICE_DELETED? Like this:

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 04.11.2015 um 19:34 schrieb Markus Armbruster: >> Paolo Bonzini writes: >> >>> Otherwise there is a race where the DEVICE_DELETED event has been sent but >>> attempts to reuse the ID will fail. >>> >>> Reported-by: Michael S.

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

Paolo Bonzini writes: > On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote: >> > 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts *before* sending >> >DEVICE_DELETED? Like this: >> > >> > +++ b/hw/core/qdev.c >> > @@ -1244,6 +1244,9 @@ static void device_unparent(Object

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

Am 04.11.2015 um 19:34 schrieb Markus Armbruster: > Paolo Bonzini writes: > >> Otherwise there is a race where the DEVICE_DELETED event has been sent but >> attempts to reuse the ID will fail. >> >> Reported-by: Michael S. Tsirkin >> Signed-off-by: Paolo

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

On 05/11/2015 13:06, Andreas Färber wrote: > > 1. Wouldn't it be cleaner to delete dev-opts *before* sending > >DEVICE_DELETED? Like this: > > > > +++ b/hw/core/qdev.c > > @@ -1244,6 +1244,9 @@ static void device_unparent(Object *obj) > > dev->parent_bus = NULL; > >

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

On 19/10/2015 13:11, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Otherwise there is a race where the DEVICE_DELETED event has been sent but > attempts to reuse the ID will fail. > > Reported-by: Michael S. Tsirkin > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini Ping? Paolo > --- >

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

Paolo Bonzini writes: > Otherwise there is a race where the DEVICE_DELETED event has been sent but > attempts to reuse the ID will fail. > > Reported-by: Michael S. Tsirkin > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini Let's see whether I understand

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qdev: free qemu-opts when the QOM path goes away

Otherwise there is a race where the DEVICE_DELETED event has been sent but attempts to reuse the ID will fail. Reported-by: Michael S. Tsirkin Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini --- hw/core/qdev.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff