From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49175) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2OL4-0000X7-1d for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 09:47:43 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2OKx-0000f8-5c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 09:47:37 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:2241) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2OKw-0000ez-Tt for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 09:47:31 -0500 Message-ID: <4F4CE8FB.8080404@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 15:47:23 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87r4xg1n5g.fsf@elfo.elfo> <4F4BBBA8.3020105@redhat.com> <4F4BFC9A.1020300@redhat.com> <4F4BFE4D.8000409@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for Tuesday 28th List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: Developers qemu-devel , Eric Blake , quintela@trasno.org, Anthony Liguori , KVM devel mailing list Il 28/02/2012 15:39, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto: > I'm not a fan of transactions or freeze/thaw (if used to atomically > perform other commands). > > We should not export low-level block device operations so that > external software can micromanage via QMP. I don't think this is a > good idea because it takes the block device offline and possibly > blocks the VM. We're reaching a level comparable to an HTTP interface > for acquiring pthread mutex, doing some operations, and then another > HTTP request to unlock it. This is micromanagement it will create > more problems because we will have to support lots of little API > functions. So you're for extending Jeff's patches to group mirroring etc.? That's also my favorite one, assuming we can do it in time for 1.1. Paolo