From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:52257) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RqLGg-0005kJ-Pj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 04:05:22 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RqLGa-0005Gn-SO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 04:05:18 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22211) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RqLGa-0005GY-Ee for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 04:05:12 -0500 Message-ID: <4F211813.7060404@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:08:35 +0100 From: Kevin Wolf MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1327140203-3165-1-git-send-email-ronniesahlberg@gmail.com> <1327140203-3165-2-git-send-email-ronniesahlberg@gmail.com> <4F1DA1D5.1010600@redhat.com> <4F20266F.20409@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4F20266F.20409@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] iSCSI: add configuration variables for iSCSI List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, ronnie sahlberg Am 25.01.2012 16:57, schrieb Eric Blake: > On 01/24/2012 11:47 PM, ronnie sahlberg wrote: >> Read from an arbitrary filedescriptor inherited from the parent process : >> 9> vnc=127.0.0.1:0 -drive file=iscsi://127.0.0.1/iqn.ronnie.test/1 >> -readconfig /proc/self/fd/9 > > That requires the existence of procfs, which is not portable (although > it does work on Linux). I'd rather see: > > -readconfig fd:9 > > which matches things for -incoming; that is, if -readconfig starts with > '/' or '.', it is a filename; otherwise, it is a protocol:value > designation, where we recognize at least the fd: protocol where a value > is the incoming fd, but we could also recognize things like exec: > protocol which is an arbitrary command to use via popen. Magic prefixes like this have one big problem: What if someone has a config file called "fd:9"? We have the very same problem with protocols in the block layer and while in the general case it's a convenient syntax, we've come to hate it in cases where it misinterprets things. Kevin