From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41915) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YYj5V-000517-E1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 18:38:50 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YYj5R-0001ma-E3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 18:38:49 -0400 Received: from smtp3.mundo-r.com ([212.51.32.191]:63418 helo=smtp4.mundo-r.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YYj5Q-0001mF-TI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 18:38:45 -0400 Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 23:38:40 +0100 From: Alberto Garcia Message-ID: <20150319223840.GA13196@igalia.com> References: <9d3f0e0ee6fcfc6300e165f79b46a4af0ffdc37d.1426779661.git.berto@igalia.com> <550B26AB.4050806@redhat.com> <20150319214201.GA11212@igalia.com> <550B4A95.9060501@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <550B4A95.9060501@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] block: allow BLOCK_IMAGE_CORRUPTED to have a node name List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: Kevin Wolf , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , Max Reitz On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 04:15:49PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > >>> -# @device: device name > >>> +# @device: device name, or node name if not present > >> > >> I think just adding a @node-name field and keeping @device as it > >> is should be good enough here. > >=20 > > I was doing the same that we discussed for BlockJobInfo here, where > > option b) seemed to have a bit more support: > >=20 > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-03/msg03651.html > >=20 > > But yeah I personally don't mind extending the event with a new field. > > Would we make 'device' optional in this case? >=20 > How hard is it to output both 'device' and 'node' in the same event, > if both are available? It's a trivial change, there's no problem at all. I assume that, for compatibility reasons, 'device' would continue to be present even if it's empty, but would you prefer to have 'node-name' as an optional field? > And for this particular event, which is not tied to block jobs but > to generic block operation, isn't it possible that we could be > reporting a corrupted backing chain where we have neither a device > name (it is not the active layer) nor a node name (if we don't add > Jeff's patch to auto-name all nodes)? In such a case, I don't know > that we can do much better anyways. Yes, it is perfectly possible. I guess any software that wants to handle those scenarios probably wants to give names to all nodes. =46rom the QEMU side, apart from giving automatic names to all nodes I don't see any other solution. Berto