similar to: Re: ioctl 00005382 not supported by Xen blkdev

We need to detach the blkdev from the BlockDriverState before calling bdrv_delete. Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> CC: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> --- hw/xen_disk.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/hw/xen_disk.c b/hw/xen_disk.c index 68fa36a..bf06fc1 100644 --- a/hw/xen_disk.c +++ b/hw/xen_disk.c

I was actually using `git llvm` in my daily workflow. Could you explain why we want people to move away from that script? In addition to the convenience, it prevented me from accidentally creating a new branch (which I did before with push once). Cheers,   Johannes On 5/11/20 11:43 AM, Zola Bridges via llvm-dev wrote: > Deleted this morning. Thanks! > Zola Bridges > > > On

Giving at least one explicit: Sounds good to me. On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:01 PM Zola Bridges via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Here is a link to the patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79348 > > Zola Bridges > > > On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:50 AM Zola Bridges <zbrid at google.com> wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> I would like to

> > I''ve given this change a go on my PE1650 (aacraid driver). > > Unfortunately this seems to be one of the SCSI drivers that doesn''t > > correctly handle the error condition. > > > > Running my usual test (''compare'' in dom0, compiles in other domains), I > > don''t see any differences in the compares, but after a

Just push :) On Tue, May 12, 2020, 8:46 AM Hiroshi Yamauchi <yamauchi at google.com> wrote: > I was also using "git llvm push" to commit, sort of out of habit. What's a > recommended, alternative way to push? > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:57 AM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> I was actually using `git

@Zola, Eric, I really feel the communication and reasoning here is problematic. From my perspective, you removed stuff "we don't need", ignoring whether it is used, and then let people figure out how to deal with the result. What I most dislike about the process most is how questions and concerns are then ignored or played down. Thanks,   Johannes On 5/12/20 2:10 PM,

TBH, all I initially asked for, still ask for, is a reason why `git llvm` was being removed. Your email was the only one that hinted on a reason. (more below) On 5/12/20 4:00 PM, David Blaikie wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:50 PM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> @Zola, Eric, >> >> >> I really feel the

Hello list, I had to boot a Dell Diagnostic Disk today, and tried doing this via memdisk - which was when I noticed memdisk isn't working for me at all, neither from pxelinux nor syslinux. After trying around with 'raw', 'bigraw' and the like I noticed it doesn't even do anything when just using: LABEL diag KERNEL memdisk .. when I try that: boot: diag nothing

Hi Zola, thanks for the response. People brought forth reasons why we should not have git scripts in the repo. I'm not sure about that but as long as we don't see other people coming forward, we don't need it in the repo. I can have a private copy after all. Thanks again,   Johannes On 5/15/20 2:16 PM, Zola Bridges via llvm-dev wrote: > Hey everyone, > > I missed

1. You neglected to cc r-help! 2. Word files are **not** text files. -- Bert Bert Gunter "The trouble with having an open mind is that people keep coming along and sticking things into it." -- Opus (aka Berkeley Breathed in his "Bloom County" comic strip ) On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Jay Zola <jayjay.1988 at hotmail.nl> wrote: > Dear sir, > > >

FWIW, I'm not against people using the script if there's a good reason for it, but I'd be somewhat opposed to mandating it, as that could easily get confusing for people like me who work in both downstream and upstream repos who wouldn't want to use the scripts downstream - it would be fairly straightforward to forget to use it/use it incorrectly, and depending on what the script

Hi everyone! I want to clarify the purpose and design of SESES. Thus far, I've characterized it as an LVI mitigation which is somewhat incorrect. SESES was built as a "big hammer." It is intended to protect against many side channel vulnerabilities (Spectre v1, Spectre v4, LVI, etc, etc) even though it was built in response to LVI. For folks protecting against LVI, this is an

I'm also a bit unclear on that point. I think one input here has to be: what are some example, existing codebases we want to mitigate, and what should the user experience be to mitigate them? I don't think we can make good engineering tradeoffs without having concrete use cases to evaluate. Another point: it seems some mitigation options have already been added to the GNU toolchain

Hi everyone, I followed up with some folks at Google about how we wanted to be involved in this group and we decided that Matthew Riley (mattdr at google.com) would be the right person to be involved here. Sorry about the confusion. I'd like to withdraw my request. Thanks again to everyone involved! I'm glad to see this becoming a part of how LLVM works. :) Zola Bridges On Wed, Jun

Hi everyone, I would like to delete this folder of svn to git migration tools. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/master/llvm/utils/git-svn My understanding of these tools is that they were useful for when we were migrating between Git and SVN, but now, since the migration is complete, they can be deleted as they are either unnecessary or there are other more common workflow options (ie

For some reason this thread seems to be gone in a wrong direction. I'm sorry for that. The discussion on the RFC asked for a reason to keep the script, I think we heard reasons to do so (due to branches). Now, I was unable to determine if the `git llvm` scripts was removed "just as part of the bunch" or if we expect a problem with the script. If it is the former, are there

Another thing to consider about your feature idea is that the output may be noisy depending on what you were hoping for. SLH tries to mitigate anything that could potentially be a problem and thus it instruments almost every branch, load, and function entry, for example. There isn't a lot of signal about what is really a gadget among the code instrumented by SLH. It really tries to be

Mydata is as under. dat=" salary ex + 1 1856 1799 + 2 1856 1800 + 3 1858 1800 + 4 1858 1801 + 5 1862 1803 + 6 1862 1805 + 7 1862 1810 + 8 1865 1805 + 9 1865 1808 + 10 1865 1815 + 11 1865 1820 + 12 1870 1810 + 13 1870 1830 + 14 1880 1840 + 15 1880 1845 + 16 1880 1851 + 17 1880 1853 + 18 1880 1855 + 19 1885 1850 + 20 1885 1852 + 21 1885 1857 + 22 1885 1860 + 23

Thanks Zola, I’d rather have point-contact people, instead of having mailing lists. I have a few goals with this: Listing particular people makes it clear who’s on the hook from your organization These people can still communicate internally, but are responsible to ensure that the internal folks know what the LLVM process and disclosure restrictions are Listing a limited number of specific people

Probably the wrong list. R-help is concerned with R programming, not statistics methodology questions, although the intersection can be nonempty. I suggest you post on stats.stackexchange.com instead, which *is* concerned with statistics methodology questions. Cheers, Bert Bert Gunter "The trouble with having an open mind is that people keep coming along and sticking things into