From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40348) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W7nJ0-0005eU-6G for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:36:59 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W7nIs-0002tD-37 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:36:54 -0500 Received: from paradis.irqsave.net ([62.212.105.220]:48450) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W7nIr-0002sV-Kq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:36:46 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 15:36:44 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= Canet Message-ID: <20140127143644.GH7415@irqsave.net> References: <1390509099-695-1-git-send-email-benoit.canet@irqsave.net> <1390509099-695-9-git-send-email-benoit.canet@irqsave.net> <20140124132619.GF3342@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <52E26C98.1070206@redhat.com> <20140124144854.GI3342@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <52E27EAF.7020209@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52E27EAF.7020209@redhat.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V6 8/8] block: Use graph node name as reference in bdrv_file_open(). List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Max Reitz Cc: Kevin Wolf , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= Canet , famz@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com Le Friday 24 Jan 2014 =C3=A0 15:54:39 (+0100), Max Reitz a =C3=A9crit : > On 24.01.2014 15:48, Kevin Wolf wrote: > >Am 24.01.2014 um 14:37 hat Max Reitz geschrieben: > >>On 24.01.2014 14:26, Kevin Wolf wrote: > >>>Am 23.01.2014 um 21:31 hat Beno=C3=AEt Canet geschrieben: > >>>>Signed-off-by: Benoit Canet > >>>>--- > >>>> block.c | 6 +++--- > >>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >>>I'm not going to merge this one yet. It breaks qemu-iotests case 071= , > >>>which would have to be adapted. > >>> > >>>However, first of all I'd like to hear the opinions of at least Eric= and > >>>Max on what BlockRef should really refer to. I think node names make > >>>most sense, but perhaps it's a bit inconvenient and the command line > >>>should default to node-name =3D id when id is set, but node-name isn= 't? > >>The QAPI schema is pretty clear about this: =E2=80=9Creferences the I= D of an > >>existing block device.=E2=80=9D > >Sure, that's because I wrote that text before we had a node name. > > > >However, in 1.7 references didn't work yet, so we still have all freed= om > >to change the interface as we like. >=20 > Yes, that's right. >=20 > >>However, if the ID cannot be found, I think > >>we should interpret it as a reference to the node name. > >> > >>Therefore, I'd first try bdrv_find() and if that returns NULL, try > >>again with bdrv_find_node(). > >I think I would prefer to avoid such ambiguities. Otherwise a manageme= nt > >tool that wants to use the node name needs to check first if it's not > >already used as a device name somewhere else and would therefore opera= te > >on the wrong device. > > > >On the other hand, a management tool using the same names for devices > >and nodes just gets what it deserves. > > > >Perhaps we should use a common namespace for both, i.e. you get an err= or > >if you try to assign a node name that is already a device name and vic= e > >versa? >=20 > This is what I would go for. However, then I don't really know why > we should separate the ID and the node name in the first place > (although that's probably because I haven't followed the discussion > around node names). >=20 > Max Ping, I still want to make quorum merge. What should be done for the references ? Best regards Beno=C3=AEt