From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45637) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VqK7R-0004NL-CH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 05:00:50 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VqK7M-0002aA-8K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 05:00:45 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:3618) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VqK7L-0002a4-Vh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 05:00:40 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:59:37 +0100 From: Kevin Wolf Message-ID: <20131210095937.GD3656@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> References: <1386263703-19292-1-git-send-email-benoit@irqsave.net> <1386263703-19292-6-git-send-email-benoit@irqsave.net> <20131209162409.GK3549@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <20131209164159.GF3364@irqsave.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131209164159.GF3364@irqsave.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V4 5/7] qmp: Allow block_resize to manipulate bs graph nodes. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= Canet Cc: famz@redhat.com, jcody@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com Am 09.12.2013 um 17:41 hat Beno=EEt Canet geschrieben: > Le Monday 09 Dec 2013 =E0 17:24:09 (+0100), Kevin Wolf a =E9crit : > > Am 05.12.2013 um 18:15 hat Beno=EEt Canet geschrieben: > > > Signed-off-by: Benoit Canet > > > --- > > > blockdev.c | 13 +++++++++---- > > > hmp.c | 2 +- > > > qapi-schema.json | 10 ++++++++-- > > > qmp-commands.hx | 3 ++- > > > 4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > >=20 > > Why would you do this on non-top-level nodes? >=20 > What is the meaning of resizing a block filter (quorum/throttle) ? > Would not we let the user resize the qcow2 file below the filters direc= tly ? Hm, right... But you wouldn't do it below the first non-filter. I imagine we need similar rules as for snapshotting there? Kevin