From: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
To: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>, qemu-block@nongnu.org
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] qapi: Allow blockdev-add for NBD
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 18:00:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56B23241.9060301@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56B22F6E.5090308@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4359 bytes --]
On 03.02.2016 17:48, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/03/2016 09:33 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
>> We have to introduce a new object (BlockdevOptionsNbd) for several
>> reasons:
>> - Neither of InetSocketAddress nor UnixSocketAddress alone is
>> sufficient, because both are supported
>> - We cannot use SocketAddress because NBD does not support an fd,
>> and because it is not a flat union which BlockdevOptionsNbd is
>
> Can we do it anyways, and just error out/document that fd is unsupported?
Would be possible, if InetSocketAddress's port was optional and if it
was a flat union.
(Note that the port not being optional is not a real issue; it just
means the user cannot omit it when using blockdev-add, but that's not so
bad.)
>> - We cannot use a flat union of InetSocketAddress and
>> UnixSocketAddress because we would need some kind of discriminator
>> which we do not have; we could inline the UnixSocketAddress as a
>> string and then make it an 'alternate' type instead of a union, but
>> this will not work either, because:
>> - InetSocketAddress itself is not suitable for NBD because the port is
>> not optional (which it is for NBD) and because it offers more options
>> (like choosing between ipv4 and ipv6) which NBD does not support.
>
> That, and qapi doesn't (yet) support the use of a flat union as the
> branch of yet another flat union.
>
> I'd like to reach the point where we can have a flat union with an
> implicit discriminator (if the discriminator was not present, the
> require a default branch), but don't think it should hold up this patch.
> I also think that future qapi improvements may make it possible to
> retrofit this struct to make the mutual exclusion between host/file more
> obvious during introspection, rather than just by documentation.
The problem here is that we really just want to merge and flatten
{Inet,Unix}SocketAddress into a single union. The discriminator
basically is of which object all the non-optional fields are present.
>> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> qapi/block-core.json | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>
>> ##
>> +# @BlockdevOptionsNbd
>> +#
>> +# Driver specific block device options for NBD. Either of @host or @path must be
>> +# specified, but not both.
>> +#
>> +# @host: #optional Connects to the given host using TCP.
>> +#
>> +# @port: #optional Specifies the TCP port to connect to; may be used only in
>> +# conjunction with @host. Defaults to 10809.
>> +#
>> +# @path: #optional Connects to the given Unix socket path.
>> +#
>> +# @export: #optional Name of the NBD export to open.
>
> Maybe mention that the default is no export name.
Can do (and will do, because you asked for it), but I thought that "Not
specifying an export name means no export name" to be self-evident. :-)
>> +#
>> +# Since: 2.6
>> +##
>> +{ 'struct': 'BlockdevOptionsNbd',
>> + 'data': { '*host': 'str',
>> + '*port': 'str',
>> + '*path': 'str',
>> + '*export': 'str' } }
>
> I'm not entirely convinced this is the final representation we want, but
> I can't immediately propose anything nicer.
Ideally, this would just be a SocketAddress. Unfortunately, this is not
possible because SocketAddress is not flat but this has to be.
The representation I guess I'd want under the circumstances would be a
flat union of InetSocketAddress and UnixSocketAddress with a semantic
discriminator as described above (check which non-optional fields are
present).
However, in order for this to work, the code generator would need to
support flat unions with such a semantic discriminator[1], and also the
@port parameter in InetSocketAddress should be optional (which might
require non-trivial changes to existing code that expects an
InetSocketAddress). However, as written above, the port not being
optional would not be too bad.
But in any case, the on-wire interface is stable and defined by
block/nbd.c already, so I believe we can enrich the definition later on.
Maybe we should define @port to be non-optional if @host is specified,
though.
Max
[1] And I don't believe I feel quite comfortable with extending the code
generator...
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-03 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-03 16:33 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] qapi: Allow blockdev-add for NBD Max Reitz
2016-02-03 16:33 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] block/nbd: Reject port parameter without host Max Reitz
2016-02-03 16:38 ` Eric Blake
2016-02-03 16:39 ` Max Reitz
2016-02-03 16:33 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] qapi: Allow blockdev-add for NBD Max Reitz
2016-02-03 16:48 ` Eric Blake
2016-02-03 17:00 ` Max Reitz [this message]
2016-02-04 11:58 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-02-03 17:06 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2016-02-03 17:16 ` Max Reitz
2016-02-04 12:01 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-02-04 13:08 ` Kevin Wolf
2016-02-04 13:19 ` Daniel P. Berrange
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56B23241.9060301@redhat.com \
--to=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.