cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Edison Su <Edison...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS]CLOUDSTACK-6191
Date Wed, 16 Jul 2014 16:57:31 GMT
The commit: a600d8408ea86782318139c17cf346c8497943d0, only fixes the "issues" reported by coverity.
Sometimes, coverity may report false alarm, that's what happened in the code I reverted.
If we want to make coverity happy, we'd better refactor the code in BridgeVifDriver->Plug

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogland@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 4:43 AM
> To: dev; Edison Su; Santhosh Edukulla
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]CLOUDSTACK-6191
> 
> Edison,
> 
> You reverted a600d8408ea86782318139c17cf346c8497943d0 in the end. The
> code in there is solving a lot of resource problems. Did you pinpoint the exact
> problem? I can not imagine that there is not a side effect that Santhosh didn't
> know about and is undesirable that is really the really the root case. We
> should find that and not just revert because an existing bug was uncovered.
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Edison Su <Edison.su@citrix.com> wrote:
> > Yoshikazu fixed the issue related to qemu-img which introduced by his
> patch in cloudstack-6191.
> > But there is another issue introduced by commit:
> a600d8408ea86782318139c17cf346c8497943d0, which causes starting vm
> failure.
> > So I checked in a commit: e1095b0110f08fb0c7965f9cf293a6073bbce511, to
> fix CLOUDSTACK-7051.
> > So I think, both CLOUDSTACK-6191 and CLOUDSTACK-7051 should be fixed
> now, no need to revert or change CLOUDSTACK-6191.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogland@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2014 11:02 AM
> >> To: dev
> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]CLOUDSTACK-6191
> >>
> >> -0 What does it fix and is the solution bonifide. We should fix the
> >> test suite if it is. The test suite not working is not enough reason
> >> to revert a commit, it should block the test-suite because the system
> >> is broken, not because of the way the test suite works.
> >>
> >> Disclaimer: I do not know enough of KVM to make a judgement call. I
> >> just got triggered by the motivation in the mail thread.
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Rayees Namathponnan
> >> <rayees.namathponnan@citrix.com> wrote:
> >> > +1 Revert now and enable after complete full test in KVM
> >> >
> >> > KVM automation blocked more than 7 days due to this defect
> >> >
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-7051
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Rayees
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
> >> > Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 2:49 PM
> >> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> > Subject: [DISCUSS]CLOUDSTACK-6191
> >> >
> >> > Move the discussion to the list about CloudStack-6191:
> >> > Automation test is blocked by this bug, we need to find a solution.
> >> > My
> >> suggestion is sort-of-revert-the-patch, but still give admin the
> >> opportunity to specify the way to optimize KVM volume creation. The
> reasons:
> >> >
> >> > 1.       End user shouldn't care about how the volume is created, is it
> >> sparse,flat/thin-provisoned or whatever technology used by
> >> hypervisor. So we'd better not expose this option in disk offering.
> >> >
> >> > 2.        It's true that admin does care about how the volume is created,
so
> >> we can add a global configuration just for the kvm volume creation.
> >> For vmware, the option is already there(vmware.create.full.clone to
> >> control whether link clone or full clone is used to create volume).
> >> We can add an option, something like kvm.qcow2.volume.create.options.
> >> > Comments?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Daan
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Daan
Mime
View raw message