From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NLDvz-0008HZ-HS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 05:50:15 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NLDvu-0008Bv-LO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 05:50:14 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41507 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NLDvt-0008Ba-5w
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 05:50:09 -0500
Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.210]:36272)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA1:24) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <hch@lst.de>) id 1NLDvs-0003Fj-Js
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 05:50:09 -0500
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:50:04 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] A different way to ask for readonly drive
Message-ID: <20091217105004.GA17205@lst.de>
References: <4B263F0B.90408@redhat.com> <4B265F7D.1010109@mail.berlios.de>
	<20091215184501.GB21298@shareable.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20091215184501.GB21298@shareable.org>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: Naphtali Sprei <nsprei@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 06:45:01PM +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> access=rw
> access=ro
> access=auto  (default)

Yes, that sounds like the least clumsy one.  I still think the current
implementation is a very bad default, though.