From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AECEC34026 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 13:13:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 159B5206F4 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 13:13:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="iagMSk94" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 159B5206F4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:34604 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j42hG-00055s-6v for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 08:13:54 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41044) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j42NN-00057A-Rj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:53:22 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1j42NM-0006Lj-Sb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:53:21 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:35671 helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1j42NM-0006Ld-Ow for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:53:20 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1582030400; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2Y+vgxiuwyMVTg5NR5Th+R/L1QP8fpIPJqnqj2lUfPw=; b=iagMSk94QBxWAVTIN6vuHB10qVfOJZl19unmJBtkxYjtNkhGGoyTRQS0qfrSf93gl6Unvr sT4G01cHMBUpJDva3Yg/Os0LxjORtd1WJiw+Cd6rKamohb3aGdL4ypNaaj/UkAlDFjUtrE 35hgnuu6myJ6aLGTk1Xpmlfo7j2gXJs= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-4-NV8WQpgLOFOwndTE7TGlpg-1; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:53:16 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A84B9107ACC7; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:53:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.3.116.180] (ovpn-116-180.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.116.180]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15E7E19E9C; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:53:15 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 32/33] block: Pass BdrvChildRole in remaining cases To: Max Reitz , qemu-block@nongnu.org References: <20200204170848.614480-1-mreitz@redhat.com> <20200204170848.614480-33-mreitz@redhat.com> <1b8cc66d-dc0e-bfa8-c060-4decdfa1242a@redhat.com> From: Eric Blake Organization: Red Hat, Inc. Message-ID: <1b65896d-5fa9-5eb9-e0f5-f9ae2fef53fd@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 06:53:14 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1b8cc66d-dc0e-bfa8-c060-4decdfa1242a@redhat.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-MC-Unique: NV8WQpgLOFOwndTE7TGlpg-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 205.139.110.120 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Kevin Wolf , Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 2/18/20 6:01 AM, Max Reitz wrote: >> >> Is it worth an assert(role) somewhere now that you've converted all >> callers to pass at least one role? >=20 > Well, as the commit message states, block_job_add_bdrv() in blockjob.c > still passes BdrvChildRole=3D0 to bdrv_root_attach_child(). So it depend= s > on what function we=E2=80=99re looking at. >=20 > I suppose we could add such an assertion to bdrv_attach_child() because > we could expect all BDSs to pass some role for their children. >=20 > OTOH, maybe a BDS has a legitimate reason not to: Maybe it just wants to > take some permissions on some BDS without having any real relationship > to it. Right now, some block jobs do that, well, except they do so > through the back door of adding the child BDS to the block job object > (which then passes no child role). So maybe I=E2=80=99d actually rather = not add > such an assertion anywhere. Fair enough - you have more knowledge of which callers remain that still=20 have a legitimate reason to not request a role. --=20 Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3226 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org