From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51554) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S0Wsu-0005zC-Af for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 06:30:56 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S0Wso-0003oL-M6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 06:30:52 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:7940) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S0Wso-0003no-CY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 06:30:46 -0500 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q1NBUiMQ022220 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 06:30:44 -0500 Message-ID: <4F462362.8030900@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:30:42 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4f139104-52f4-485c-b06f-de456806a795@zmail16.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4f139104-52f4-485c-b06f-de456806a795@zmail16.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] Add nocreate option to snapshot_blkdev List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Federico Simoncelli Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, mtosatti@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 02/23/2012 11:19 AM, Federico Simoncelli wrote: >>> I'm worried that blkmirror does not satisfy _all_ mirroring >>> needs, for example you cannot use block_stream to copy from the >>> source to the destination, so perhaps in the future we want to >>> change it to something else. > > Are you talking about a mirroring where you block_stream the missing > clusters in the destination from the source? I believe that it could > be done without losing the blkmirror modularity probably extending > the BlockDriver structure with some additional concepts. Yes, agreed. It's not the idea of a driver that I don't like; it is making it available through the command-line that worries me. This would be unlike all other "filtering" options (copy-on-read, I/O limits, dirty sector tracking). True, there are blkdebug and blkverify but those are for debugging only. Paolo