From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <chellwig@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>,
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: block: format vs. protocol, and how they stack
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 13:51:45 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C1DF2C1.5040505@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3ocf8ts1y.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
On 06/18/2010 03:59 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> The code is pretty confused about format vs. protocol, and so are we.
> Let's try to figure them out.
>
> From cruising altitude, all this format, protocol, stacking business
> doesn't matter. We provide a bunch of arguments, and get an image.
>
> If you look more closely, providing that image involves sub-tasks. One
> is to haul bits. Another one is to translate between bits in different
> formats.
>
> Working hypothesis:
>
> * A protocol hauls image bits. Examples: file, host_device, nbd.
>
> * A format translates image formats. Examples: raw, qcow2.
>
>
Is there a reason to make the distinction? Is there a reason to expose
the distinction to the user?
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-20 10:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-18 12:59 [Qemu-devel] block: format vs. protocol, and how they stack Markus Armbruster
2010-06-20 10:51 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2010-06-21 7:00 ` [Qemu-devel] " Markus Armbruster
2010-06-22 16:46 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-21 8:19 ` Kevin Wolf
2010-06-21 13:09 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-21 13:30 ` Kevin Wolf
2010-06-21 13:37 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-21 14:01 ` Kevin Wolf
2010-06-21 14:51 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-21 14:52 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-21 15:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-21 15:22 ` Paul Brook
2010-06-21 15:37 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-21 16:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-21 16:09 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-21 16:36 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-06-21 16:21 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-06-22 8:32 ` Kevin Wolf
2010-06-22 14:24 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-06-28 10:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-22 16:30 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-21 15:34 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-22 8:10 ` Kevin Wolf
2010-06-22 12:39 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-22 12:57 ` Kevin Wolf
2010-06-22 13:07 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-06-21 15:56 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-06-22 8:22 ` Kevin Wolf
2010-06-22 16:40 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-22 16:56 ` Daniel P. Berrange
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=4C1DF2C1.5040505@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=chellwig@redhat.com \
--cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=lcapitulino@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/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).