From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=38038 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P5exg-0008MF-KD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:32:13 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P5exf-0001v9-OR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:32:12 -0400 Received: from mail-iw0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]:43044) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P5exf-0001v1-LN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:32:11 -0400 Received: by iwn34 with SMTP id 34so3628266iwn.4 for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2010 06:32:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4CB46358.6050200@codemonkey.ws> Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 08:32:08 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] docs: Add QED image format specification References: <1286552914-27014-1-git-send-email-stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1286552914-27014-4-git-send-email-stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4CB317EF.7070504@redhat.com> <20101011153039.GD5439@stefan-thinkpad.transitives.com> <4CB32F95.8040301@redhat.com> <20101011154656.GE5439@stefan-thinkpad.transitives.com> <4CB338EC.3080504@codemonkey.ws> <4CB34605.8030606@codemonkey.ws> <4CB41759.3050606@redhat.com> <20101012131639.GA4200@stefan-thinkpad.transitives.com> In-Reply-To: <20101012131639.GA4200@stefan-thinkpad.transitives.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: Kevin Wolf , Christoph Hellwig , Avi Kivity , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 10/12/2010 08:16 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > >> Well, the protocol is currently encoded in the file name, separated by a >> colon. Of course, we want to get rid of that, but we still don't know >> what we want instead. It's completely unrelated to the backing file >> format, though, it's about the format of the backing file name. >> > I agree with Kevin. There's no need to have the ill-defined backing > format AFAICT. > Yeah, I've now convinced myself we don't need backing format name too. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Stefan >