Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/8] block: add eject request callback

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

On 11/07/2011 02:49 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> >  2. eject with -f should really never be needed, but it does whatever is
> >  needed to be able to follow up with a "change" command.  It turns out it
> >  is really "unlock" and "ask the guest to eject" combined, but that's the
> >  implementation, not the model.
>
> Does this give different results than just asking the guest to eject
> without forcefully unlocking? I would expect that a guest that responds
> to the eject request would also unlock the drive. In which case I think
> eject without -f should be enough?

Only if the guest is not buggy (e.g. locks the tray but stops polling 
for eject requests) and has not crashed.

Paolo