From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:52740)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1QoBAl-0006Q6-Cn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 05:22:00 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1QoBAk-000847-DX
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 05:21:59 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48437)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1QoBAk-000843-6a
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 05:21:58 -0400
Message-ID: <4E37C265.60307@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 11:24:53 +0200
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1311914994-20482-1-git-send-email-devin122@gmail.com>
	<1311914994-20482-2-git-send-email-devin122@gmail.com>
	<20110802085649.GA8912@stefanha-thinkpad.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <20110802085649.GA8912@stefanha-thinkpad.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 01/24] block: add block conversion api
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Cc: Devin Nakamura <devin122@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Am 02.08.2011 10:56, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
>> @@ -263,4 +345,10 @@ static inline unsigned int get_physical_block_exp(BlockConf *conf)
>>      DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("discard_granularity", _state, \
>>                         _conf.discard_granularity, 0)
>>  
>> +struct BlockConversionOptions {
>> +    int encryption_type;
>> +    uint64_t image_size;
>> +    uint64_t cluster_size;
> 
> These two fields can be extracted using existing block.h APIs.  Does it
> make sense to add a bdrv_get_encryption_type() instead?  That way
> qemu-img info can also show display the encryption type and you can drop
> this struct.

Hm... We already have BlockDriverInfo, which is used by qemu-img. Would
it make sense to add the fields there? In any case I would prefer
something that fills a whole struct at once instead of calling ten
separate functions and building the struct in the caller.

Kevin