From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34693) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W7rZP-0007kv-HG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 14:10:12 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W7rZK-00026n-EG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 14:10:07 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:56874) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W7rZK-000260-6N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 14:10:02 -0500 Message-ID: <52E6AF7F.90000@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 20:11:59 +0100 From: Max Reitz MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1390509099-695-1-git-send-email-benoit.canet@irqsave.net> <1390509099-695-9-git-send-email-benoit.canet@irqsave.net> <20140124132619.GF3342@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <52E26C98.1070206@redhat.com> <20140124144854.GI3342@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <52E27EAF.7020209@redhat.com> <20140127143644.GH7415@irqsave.net> In-Reply-To: <20140127143644.GH7415@irqsave.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V6 8/8] block: Use graph node name as reference in bdrv_file_open(). List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?B?QmVub8OudCBDYW5ldA==?= Cc: Kevin Wolf , famz@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com On 27.01.2014 15:36, Beno=C3=AEt Canet wrote: > Le Friday 24 Jan 2014 =C3=A0 15:54:39 (+0100), Max Reitz a =C3=A9crit : >> On 24.01.2014 15:48, Kevin Wolf wrote: >>> Am 24.01.2014 um 14:37 hat Max Reitz geschrieben: >>>> On 24.01.2014 14:26, Kevin Wolf wrote: >>>>> Am 23.01.2014 um 21:31 hat Beno=C3=AEt Canet geschrieben: >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Benoit Canet >>>>>> --- >>>>>> block.c | 6 +++--- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>>> I'm not going to merge this one yet. It breaks qemu-iotests case 07= 1, >>>>> which would have to be adapted. >>>>> >>>>> However, first of all I'd like to hear the opinions of at least Eri= c and >>>>> Max on what BlockRef should really refer to. I think node names mak= e >>>>> most sense, but perhaps it's a bit inconvenient and the command lin= e >>>>> should default to node-name =3D id when id is set, but node-name is= n't? >>>> The QAPI schema is pretty clear about this: =E2=80=9Creferences the = ID of an >>>> existing block device.=E2=80=9D >>> Sure, that's because I wrote that text before we had a node name. >>> >>> However, in 1.7 references didn't work yet, so we still have all free= dom >>> to change the interface as we like. >> Yes, that's right. >> >>>> However, if the ID cannot be found, I think >>>> we should interpret it as a reference to the node name. >>>> >>>> Therefore, I'd first try bdrv_find() and if that returns NULL, try >>>> again with bdrv_find_node(). >>> I think I would prefer to avoid such ambiguities. Otherwise a managem= ent >>> tool that wants to use the node name needs to check first if it's not >>> already used as a device name somewhere else and would therefore oper= ate >>> on the wrong device. >>> >>> On the other hand, a management tool using the same names for devices >>> and nodes just gets what it deserves. >>> >>> Perhaps we should use a common namespace for both, i.e. you get an er= ror >>> if you try to assign a node name that is already a device name and vi= ce >>> versa? >> This is what I would go for. However, then I don't really know why >> we should separate the ID and the node name in the first place >> (although that's probably because I haven't followed the discussion >> around node names). >> >> Max > Ping, > > I still want to make quorum merge. > What should be done for the references ? > > Best regards > > Beno=C3=AEt My only problem is that I don't really know what IDs are for, then. ;-) Currently, I think using the node name is probably (more) correct and it=20 can't hurt anyone; thus, I'm okay with this patch. Max