From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60452 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OHCEG-0002YY-Sa for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 04:44:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHCEF-0004s9-MD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 04:44:44 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1025) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHCEF-0004qy-CY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 04:44:43 -0400 Message-ID: <4BFCDF4D.5020703@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 10:43:57 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] Add cache=volatile parameter to -drive References: <1274091292-4812-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <4BF14CE9.5040907@suse.de> <4BF15DC8.8080104@codemonkey.ws> <201005171723.15675.paul@codesourcery.com> <4BF16E22.6090400@codemonkey.ws> <4BFC0FF6.1080005@suse.de> <20100525210113.GE1402@hall.aurel32.net> <4BFC79E8.1070700@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4BFC79E8.1070700@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paul Brook , Alexander Graf , Aurelien Jarno , hch@lst.de Am 26.05.2010 03:31, schrieb Anthony Liguori: > On 05/25/2010 04:01 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote: >> >> I really think this patch can be useful, in my own case when testing >> debian-installer (I already cache=writeback). In short all that is about >> developing and testing, as opposed to run a VM in production, can >> benefit about that. This was one of the original use case of QEMU before >> KVM arrived. >> >> Unless someone can convince me not to do it, I seriously considering >> applying this patch. >> > > There really needs to be an indication in the --help output of what the > ramifications of this option are, in the very least. It should also be > removable via a ./configure option because no sane distribution should > enable this for end users. We know better what you stupid user want? There are valid use cases for this cache option, most notably installation. I could agree with requesting that the option should be called cache=unsafe (or even Alex' cache=destroys_your_image), but that should really be enough to tell everyone that his data is not safe with this option. Kevin