Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 7/7] block: dump to monitor for bdrv_snapshot_dump() and bdrv_image_info_dump()

[Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>]

On Mon, 06 May 2013 10:09:43 +0800
Wenchao Xia <xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> 于 2013-5-3 10:51, Wenchao Xia 写道:
> > 于 2013-5-2 20:02, Luiz Capitulino 写道:
> >> On Thu, 02 May 2013 10:05:08 +0800
> >> Wenchao Xia <xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> 于 2013-4-30 3:05, Luiz Capitulino 写道:
> >>>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 16:46:57 +0200
> >>>> Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 05:31:15PM +0800, Wenchao Xia wrote:
> >>>>>> @@ -2586,10 +2585,12 @@ void do_info_snapshots(Monitor *mon, const
> >>>>>> QDict *qdict)
> >>>>>>        }
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>        if (total > 0) {
> >>>>>> -        monitor_printf(mon, "%s\n", bdrv_snapshot_dump(buf,
> >>>>>> sizeof(buf), NULL));
> >>>>>> +        bdrv_snapshot_dump(NULL);
> >>>>>> +        monitor_printf(mon, "\n");
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Luiz: any issue with mixing monitor_printf(mon) and
> >>>>> monitor_vprintf(cur_mon) calls?  I guess there was a reason for
> >>>>> explicitly passing mon instead of relying on cur_mon.
> >>>>
> >>>> where are they being mixed?
> >>>>
> >>>     bdrv_snapshot_dump() used a global variable "cur_mon" inside,
> >>> instead
> >>> of let caller pass in a explicit montior* "mon", I guess that is the
> >>> question.
> >>
> >> I'd have to see the code to tell, but yes, what Stefan described is the
> >> best practice for the Monitor.
> >>
> >    I think this would not be a problem until qemu wants more than one
> > human monitor console, and then we may require a data structure to tell
> > where to output the string: stdout, *mon, or even stderr, and
> > error_printf() also need to be changed.
> >
>    Luiz, what is your idea? I'd like to respin v2 if no issues for it.

As I said before, I'd have to see the code to tell. But answering your comment,
the code does support multiple monitors.