From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34171) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fSoaO-0005mq-Px for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:04:09 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fSoaN-0000bl-Us for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:04:08 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: <20180607062559.16127-1-armbru@redhat.com> <20180607213303.GJ6435@localhost.localdomain> <20180612125548.GA19946@localhost.localdomain> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:04:01 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20180612125548.GA19946@localhost.localdomain> (Jeff Cody's message of "Tue, 12 Jun 2018 08:55:48 -0400") Message-ID: <87y3fjn7xa.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/19] block: Configuration fixes and rbd authentication List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jeff Cody Cc: Markus Armbruster , kwolf@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org, mreitz@redhat.com Jeff Cody writes: > On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 05:33:03PM -0400, Jeff Cody wrote: >> Here are some results from auth testing of various combinations; I haven't >> completed all the combinations in my matrix yet, but what I have completed >> looks like what I would expect. >> >> These were all tested with blockdev-add QAPI commands against this patch >> series. >> >> I'll be away on PTO tomorrow (Friday), so I'll conclude testing on Monday. >> >> Warning, long lines below, so don't read it on a vt220 (apologies in >> advance if you do...): >> > > Below is the rest of the matrix filled out. Everything looks OK to me, the > ones that were a bit different than I expected were when the server was > 'none', and we passed an bad key-secret. But that isn't a qemu/qapi issue, > and not really an issue at all (just different from what I expected). > > Completed tests: [...] Looks good to me. Thanks for your help!