Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] qapi: block-dirty-bitmap-remove transaction action

[Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>]

Am 18.06.2019 um 09:31 hat Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy geschrieben:
> 17.06.2019 19:03, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Am 17.06.2019 um 13:37 hat Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy geschrieben:
> >> 08.06.2019 1:26, John Snow wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 6/3/19 8:00 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> >>>> Hi all!
> >>>>
> >>>> Here is block-dirty-bitmap-remove transaction action.
> >>>>
> >>>> It is used to do transactional movement of the bitmap (which is
> >>>> possible in conjunction with merge command). Transactional bitmap
> >>>> movement is needed in scenarios with external snapshot, when we don't
> >>>> want to leave copy of the bitmap in the base image.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Oh, interesting. I see why you want this now. OK, let's do it.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi John!
> >>
> >> Hmm, could you stage it, or should I fix something? Seems I've answered all questions.
> >> We need this for our nearest release and wanting to avoid x-vz- prefixes in the API,
> >> I'd be very grateful if we merge it soon.
> > 
> > I hope you won't have to do this, but in any case x-vz- isn't the right
> > prefix. Please read section '6. Downstream extension of QMP' in
> > docs/interop/qmp-spec.txt before adding your own extensions.
> > 
> > According to the spec, your prefix would be something like
> > __com.virtuozzo-...
> > 
> 
> Thanks for pointing to that, I thought about this some time ago when saw Red Hat prefixes..
> Still x-vz- is a lot better than nothing and most probably will not intersect with future
> things. However, we'll move to correct prefixes of course.

Yes, I agree that x-vz- is unlikely to cause any trouble in practice,
it's just out-of-spec strictly speaking. So for anything new that you
introduce, it would be better to follow the spec.

Kevin