From: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
To: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kwolf@redhat.com,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
qemu-block@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: handling image options with drive-mirror/drive-backup
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 16:43:25 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160929084325.GA1118@lemon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160929083435.GE5312@redhat.com>
On Thu, 09/29 09:34, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> I got a report that the LUKS block driver was not working in combination
> with the drive-mirror command and have been investigating possible fixes
> for this.
>
> The core problem here is dealing with the target image. If you try to
> run with a pre-created target that is a LUKS image, it will fail because
> we have no way to provide the "key-secret" option required to open the
> target. If you try to tell drive-mirror to create a new target with
> LUKS format, it will fail trying to create the image, again because
> no "key-secret" option can be provided.
>
> While this is a fundamental blocker problem for LUKS, it also affects
> other image formats. For example, if you're telling drive-mirror to
> create a new qcow2 volume, its impossible to control desirable attributes
> like cluster-size, or compat-level. If you're mirroring a qcow2 file to
> a new qcow2 file, it is impossible to maintain any custom runtimes opts
> yuou might have set on the source - eg 'lazy-refcounts', or the various
> discard settings will all be stuck on defaults for the target.
>
> You can workaround the problem of being able to create new volumes by
> just creating them using qemu-img ahead of time instead.
>
> Dealing with the problem of opening images, requires that we have some
> way to provide block options to the drive-mirror command. The naive
> approach would to just add a new parameter
>
> 'options': ['str']
>
> but IMHO this is just perpetuating the broken design of drive-mirror.
>
> The core problem is that this command should not have been using a
> plain target + format pair of strings in the first place. Instead it
> should have had a single
>
> "target": "BlockdevOptions"
>
> So my suggestion is that we deprecate "drive-mirror" and define a fixed
> command "drive-mirror-blockdev" (or "blockdev-mirror" ?) that accepts
> the proper BlockdevOptions QAPI type for the target as above.
Are you aware that there is already a blockdev-mirror command? Supposedly it
can do what you need, together with blockdev-add once the latter is deemed
ready.
>
> This only solves the "open an existing image" case - if we want to
> have drive-mirror be able to create new images, then we need to have
> a new struct "BlockdevCreateOptions", since creation options are a
> superset of the "BlockdevOptions". I'm inclined to say that the
> "drive-mirror" command should *not* have the ability to create new
> images, as I can't see a compelling reason to overload that functionality
> in the same command.
Images can be created out of bound with qemu-img, and opened with blockdev-add.
>
> Instead we should add a "blockdev-create" QMP command for doing that
> action explicitly, that apps can invoke just prior to running the
> drive-mirror command. We'd also want "blockdev-delete" to allow it
> to be deleted on failure.
>
> It looks like the same design problem of drive-mirror also applies
> to drive-backup.
There is also blockdev-backup already.
Fam
>
> Co-incidentally I had already been experimenting with the creation
> of a "BlockdevCreateOptions" QAPI type, in order to support the
> fully-nested block device creation with 'qemu-img create'.
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
> --
> |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
> |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
> |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-29 8:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-29 8:34 [Qemu-devel] RFC: handling image options with drive-mirror/drive-backup Daniel P. Berrange
2016-09-29 8:43 ` Fam Zheng [this message]
2016-09-29 8:51 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2016-09-29 9:09 ` Fam Zheng
2016-09-29 9:15 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2016-09-29 9:25 ` Fam Zheng
2016-09-29 9:17 ` Kevin Wolf
2016-09-29 9:43 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2016-09-29 10:29 ` Kashyap Chamarthy
2016-09-29 10:37 ` Kevin Wolf
2016-09-29 9:47 ` Kashyap Chamarthy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160929084325.GA1118@lemon \
--to=famz@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).