Re: [Qemu-devel] QMP: RFC: I/O error info & query-stop-reason

[Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>]

On 06/07/2011 10:54 AM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 10:39:45 -0500
> Anthony Liguori<anthony@codemonkey.ws>  wrote:
>
>> On 06/07/2011 09:46 AM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>>> On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 08:08:51 -0500
>>> Anthony Liguori<anthony@codemonkey.ws>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 06/06/2011 04:25 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>>>> Am 02.06.2011 20:09, schrieb Luiz Capitulino:
>>>>>>>> I'm ok with either way. But in case you meant the second one, I guess
>>>>>>>> we should make "reason" a dictionary so that we can group related
>>>>>>>> information when we extend the field, for example:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      "reason": { "no space": false, "no permission": true }
>>>>>
>>>>> Splitting up enums into a number of booleans looks like a bad idea to
>>>>> me. It makes things more verbose than they should be, and even worse, it
>>>>> implies that more than one field could be true.
>>>>
>>>> I agree.  What I had suggested was to not have a reason at all.
>>>
>>> Is it better if we add a new enum to query-block? Like the "io-error" key we
>>> have talked about earlier? Like:
>>>
>>>    "io-error": "no space"
>>
>> 1) enums have to follow some rules.  One obvious rule would be there
>> can't be spaces in the enum value.
>>
>> 2) Do we have an defined enum values besides no-space?  If not, let's
>> not artificially add an enum.
>>
>>>
>>> We could have "no space", "low level" (that's how the man page defines EIO) and
>>> "unknown".
>>
>> 3) what's the difference between "no space" and "low level"?
>
> The latter means the device doesn't have enough space to write more data,
> the former is I/O I guess it's more device specific.

Sorry, I meant to ask, what's the difference between "low level" and 
"unknown".

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
> What's your suggestion?
>