From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:41081) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qnufs-0007vv-ML for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 11:45:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qnufn-0007TB-Ry for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 11:45:00 -0400 Received: from mail-gy0-f173.google.com ([209.85.160.173]:34738) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qnufn-0007T6-M2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 11:44:55 -0400 Received: by gyg8 with SMTP id 8so4202573gyg.4 for ; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:44:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E36C9F4.2080202@codemonkey.ws> Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 10:44:52 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20110727113000.25109.16204.sendpatchset@skannery> <20110727113045.25109.54866.sendpatchset@skannery> <4E300B8E.2020509@codemonkey.ws> <4E3036AA.8030604@codemonkey.ws> <4E36C608.2030107@codemonkey.ws> <4E36C9D3.4020803@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4E36C9D3.4020803@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [V5 Patch 3/4]Qemu: Command "block_set" for dynamic block params change List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: Supriya Kannery , Stefan Hajnoczi , Christoph Hellwig , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 08/01/2011 10:44 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 01.08.2011 17:28, schrieb Anthony Liguori: >>> 2. Top-level command for each parameter (e.g. block_set_hostcache). >>> Supported parameters are easily discoverable via query-commands. If >>> individual block devices support different sets of parameters then >>> they may have to return -ENOTSUPP. >>> >>> I like the block_set approach. >>> >>> Anthony, Kevin, Supriya: Any thoughts? >> >> For the sake of overall QMP sanity, I think block_set_hostcache is >> really our only option. > > Ideally we should have blockdev_add, and blockdev_set would just take > the same arguments and update the given driver. Ideally we'd have a backend_add, backend_set, etc. But in the absence of that, we should provide the best interface we can with the current tools we have. For now, using high level commands is the best we can do. Regards, Anthony Liguori > > But we don't have blockdev_add today, so whatever works for your as a > temporary solution... > > Kevin >