Re: [Qemu-block] does blk_commit_all need blk_all_next?

[Max Reitz]

On 24.10.2016 10:45, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> blk_commit_all is in block/block-backend.c only because it uses
> blk_all_next.  This is also the only reason why it needs a stub
> (stubs/blk-commit-all.c).
> 
> The only difference between blk_next and blk_all_next is that the latter
> "iterates over all BlockBackends, even the ones which are hidden (i.e.
> are not referenced by the monitor)".  Should blk_commit_all really
> iterate over BlockBackends such as the NBD server or the block jobs'?

I guess bdrv_commit_all() did, so blk_commit_all() does now, too.

The issue is, though, that currently "hidden BB" is equivalent to
"anonymous BB". And I think that Kevin is working towards basically all
BBs being anonymous, i.e. hidden.

When using -drive without id but with node-name, then you'll get a
hidden BB. So we can't get away without blk_all_next().

But maybe it would make sense to skip all BBs that are not attached to a
device?

Max

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature