From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36101)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1Voyde-0002Kw-CE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 11:52:31 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1VoydY-0008Hh-TA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 11:52:26 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:18030)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1VoydY-0008Hb-Kj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 11:52:20 -0500
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:52:15 -0500
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20131206115215.0427a956@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <52A1EC31.7000709@redhat.com>
References: <1386263703-19292-1-git-send-email-benoit@irqsave.net>
	<1386263703-19292-5-git-send-email-benoit@irqsave.net>
	<20131206092703.5d60345a@redhat.com> <52A1EC31.7000709@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V4 4/7] qmp: Allow to change password on
 names block driver states.
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: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, famz@redhat.com, =?UTF-8?B?QmVub8OudA==?= Canet <benoit@irqsave.net>, jcody@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com

On Fri, 06 Dec 2013 08:24:33 -0700
Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 12/06/2013 07:27 AM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > On Thu,  5 Dec 2013 18:15:00 +0100
> > Beno=C3=AEt Canet <benoit@irqsave.net> wrote:
>=20
> >> -{ 'command': 'block_passwd', 'data': {'device': 'str', 'password': 's=
tr'} }
> >> +{ 'command': 'block_passwd', 'data': {'*device': 'str',
> >> +                                      '*node-name': 'str', 'password'=
: 'str'} }
> >=20
> > What about:
> >=20
> > { 'command': 'block_passwd', 'data': {'device': 'str',
> >                                       '*device-is-node': 'bool', 'passw=
ord': 'str'} }
>=20
> That would also work; the naming is a bit more awkward, but then you
> don't have the issue of mutually-exclusive optional arguments where
> exactly one of the two arguments is required.

Yes, and I dislike that very much.

Btw, can anyone remind me why we can't have new commands instead?

> I'm leaning slightly towards the approach that Beno=C3=AEt took, if only =
for
> the naming aspect (that is, I also thought of the idea of a bool flag,
> but didn't suggest it because I didn't like the implications on the
> naming).  But I can live with either approach, if anyone else has a
> strong opinion.

Well, we can pick up any descriptive name 'treat-device-as-a-node',
'device-is-a-graph-node'...