[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 18/39] block: Add BlockBackendRootState
From: |
Kevin Wolf |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 18/39] block: Add BlockBackendRootState |
Date: |
Mon, 19 Oct 2015 16:42:16 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
Am 19.10.2015 um 16:32 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
> On 19.10.2015 16:18, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Am 12.10.2015 um 22:00 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
> >> This structure will store some of the state of the root BDS if the BDS
> >> tree is removed, so that state can be restored once a new BDS tree is
> >> inserted.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <address@hidden>
> >
> > Random thought, not directly related to this series:
> >
> > We currently don't have a way to create just a BlockBackend with no
> > medium. If we were to add that, would we want that to be just like a
> > missing -drive file=... option, or would it actually make sense to
> > specify the BlockBackendRootState?
>
> We don't? -drive if=none,id=foo works just fine for me. Issuing qemu-io
> foo "read 0 512" then prints "read failed: " + strerror(ENOMEDIUM) to
> stderr.
Sorry, I meant "no blockdev-add way", i.e. hotplug an empty BB in QMP.
> > If we want to do that, we might actually have found a reason why the
> > 'options' key makes sense in blockdev-add. We could make it a union
> > where you either describe a BlockBackendRootState or a BDS.
>
> I really wouldn't want to use the BBRS for anything but legacy support
> (i.e. change inheriting the options of the last medium)...
Fair enough. Then I guess it was a random stupid thought.
> > Another related question is whether we want to separate out BB options
> > (which would otherwise be shared between the BBRS and BDS variants) into
> > their own dict. This dict could be optional and that would be the way to
> > specify whether you want a BB on top or not. Candidates for this dict
> > are id/rerror/werror.
> >
> > There are more fields that exist in both the BDS and BBRS variants, but
> > don't really belong to the BB (i.e. they end up in the real BBRS and not
> > in the BB, and are only valid as long as no BDS is attached). These
> > would not be moved to the BB options dict.
> >
> > Any opinions?
>
> Not on the latter part.
Pity.
Kevin
pgpGX6m1Za8oT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 11/39] hw/usb-storage: Check whether BB is inserted, (continued)
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 11/39] hw/usb-storage: Check whether BB is inserted, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 12/39] block: Fix BB AIOCB AioContext without BDS, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 13/39] block: Move guest_block_size into BlockBackend, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 15/39] block: Move BlockAcctStats into BlockBackend, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 16/39] block: Move I/O status and error actions into BB, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 17/39] block/throttle-groups: Make incref/decref public, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 19/39] block: Make some BB functions fall back to BBRS, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 18/39] block: Add BlockBackendRootState, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 20/39] block: Fail requests to empty BlockBackend, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 24/39] blockdev: Do not create BDS for empty drive, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 23/39] block: Prepare for NULL BDS, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 25/39] blockdev: Pull out blockdev option extraction, Max Reitz, 2015/10/12