From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43464)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1Ya0xC-0008Hv-Vd
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 07:55:35 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1Ya0x7-0005bF-Uo
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 07:55:34 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:59764)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1Ya0x7-0005b8-PA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 07:55:29 -0400
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1426861657.git.berto@igalia.com>
	<cover.1426861657.git.berto@igalia.com>
	<761b091f1fa10354f9594cf7a867cf6eb2701b1f.1426861657.git.berto@igalia.com>
	<87egogt6hs.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<20150323095311.GA18824@igalia.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:55:26 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20150323095311.GA18824@igalia.com> (Alberto Garcia's message of
	"Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:53:11 +0100")
Message-ID: <877fu8orm9.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] block: add 'node-name' field to
	BLOCK_IMAGE_CORRUPTED
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>, Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>

Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com> writes:

> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:20:31AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
[...]
>> Ignorant question: can "device" be ""? If yes, we should document
>> what that means, possibly in a separate patch.
>
> Yes it can be "", the purpose of the patch is precisely to expand the
> event with a new field that can identify the node in such cases.
>
> The only reason why it is not optional is to keep backward
> compatibility.
>
> But it's true that it can be clarified in the documentation, I can
> send a follow-up patch as soon as this one is merged.

Follow-up patch works for me.