Re: [Qemu-devel] BB name vs. BDS name in the QAPI schema

[Kevin Wolf]

Am 15.09.2014 um 03:31 hat Fam Zheng geschrieben:
> On Sat, 09/13 19:04, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> > 
> > I actually like having separate parameters for separate kinds of names.  
> > 
> > However, BlockdevRef appears to tie our hand: it's an anonymous union,
> > which means only the value is on the wire, and the receiving end uses
> > its type to determine which union member it is.  Both kinds of names are
> > strings, so we can't have separate union members for them.
> > 
> > Opinions?
> 
> Why wouldn't it work without distinguishing it in the QAPI side?

BlockRef takes either a string referring to an existing BDS (using
device_name or node-name) or a dict of options for creating a new one.

> I remember at the time of introducing node-name, it was in a separate
> namespace, but now it's not. Then why should the user care *whether* a name is
> "device" or "node-name"?

When you reconfigure the graph (e.g. by taking a live snapshot), the BB
name always stays at the root (i.e. points to the new BDS), whereas the
node-name always stays at the same node (which was at the root, but
isn't any more), that's probably important for the user. Maybe a bit
like branches and tags in git.

So yes, they are somewhat different, but in the end they all resolve to
a BDS and it makes sense to allow accessing them in a uniform way (just
like 'git show <tag-name>' works the same as 'git show <branch-name>').

Which leads me to this conclusion: One mandatory string argument per
command is enough, and also results in a cleaner interface than having
two optional arguments that aren't truly optional because you need to
specify the one xor the other.

Kevin