From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44160)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VlG67-000351-Rs
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 05:42:33 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VlG61-0002x9-Q1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 05:42:27 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:65316)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VlG61-0002x3-Ie
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 05:42:21 -0500
Message-ID: <52947AF4.1010607@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:41:56 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1385097894-1380-1-git-send-email-famz@redhat.com>
	<1385097894-1380-3-git-send-email-famz@redhat.com>
	<52938532.1080803@redhat.com> <52940262.2090406@redhat.com>
	<5294683F.8090004@redhat.com>
	<CABgc4wRzJhsN-LyxXzbSWWnWiic4GZUBSiP=-tBLp9K=v0q_Ug@mail.gmail.com>
	<52947734.80207@redhat.com>
	<CABgc4wRgbAm+e8u20My7Tf9KHi7Ohf_Mor0Kxq6E=BUDfv6-sA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABgc4wRgbAm+e8u20My7Tf9KHi7Ohf_Mor0Kxq6E=BUDfv6-sA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 2/7] block: Introduce op_blockers to
	BlockDriverState
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: Fam Zheng <famcool@gmail.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>, hbrock@redhat.com, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, rjones@redhat.com, imain@redhat.com, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

Il 26/11/2013 11:31, Fam Zheng ha scritto:
>> > I would just use an uint64_t, I think you have ~20 operations now.
>> > There is still quite some breathing room.
>> >
> OK. Then, can we still use QAPI enum? Because I think being possible
> to query blockers makes sense, that way the user doesn't have to trial
> and error to know what operation is blocked.

Yes, we can.  You would still have to add a bunch of

#define BLOCK_OPERATION_MASK_RESIZE (1ULL << BLOCK_OPERATION_TYPE_RESIZE)

in block.h.

Paolo