From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50953)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1UXsE4-0002Cr-QP
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 08:03:12 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1UXsE3-0001db-4l
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 08:03:04 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:12122)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1UXsE2-0001d7-Ss
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 08:03:03 -0400
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 08:02:06 -0400
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20130502080206.21df203f@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <5181C9D4.4000905@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <1366968675-1451-1-git-send-email-xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<1366968675-1451-8-git-send-email-xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<20130426144657.GB7648@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
	<20130429150541.298db151@redhat.com>
	<5181C9D4.4000905@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 7/7] block: dump to monitor for
 bdrv_snapshot_dump() and bdrv_image_info_dump()
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: Wenchao Xia <xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, phrdina@redhat.com, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com

On Thu, 02 May 2013 10:05:08 +0800
Wenchao Xia <xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> =E4=BA=8E 2013-4-30 3:05, Luiz Capitulino =E5=86=99=E9=81=93:
> > On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 16:46:57 +0200
> > Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 05:31:15PM +0800, Wenchao Xia wrote:
> >>> @@ -2586,10 +2585,12 @@ void do_info_snapshots(Monitor *mon, const QD=
ict *qdict)
> >>>       }
> >>>
> >>>       if (total > 0) {
> >>> -        monitor_printf(mon, "%s\n", bdrv_snapshot_dump(buf, sizeof(b=
uf), NULL));
> >>> +        bdrv_snapshot_dump(NULL);
> >>> +        monitor_printf(mon, "\n");
> >>
> >> Luiz: any issue with mixing monitor_printf(mon) and
> >> monitor_vprintf(cur_mon) calls?  I guess there was a reason for
> >> explicitly passing mon instead of relying on cur_mon.
> >
> > where are they being mixed?
> >
>    bdrv_snapshot_dump() used a global variable "cur_mon" inside, instead
> of let caller pass in a explicit montior* "mon", I guess that is the
> question.

I'd have to see the code to tell, but yes, what Stefan described is the
best practice for the Monitor.