From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59624) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YvYKR-0007LE-Tk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 21 May 2015 17:48:36 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YvYKO-0003wl-N0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 21 May 2015 17:48:35 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:38052) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YvYKO-0003wg-EL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 21 May 2015 17:48:32 -0400 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t4LLmVU9013267 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Thu, 21 May 2015 17:48:31 -0400 Message-ID: <555E52AE.2040001@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 17:48:30 -0400 From: John Snow MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1431460381-8530-1-git-send-email-jsnow@redhat.com> <55525D43.6060402@redhat.com> <555BA8A4.8070407@redhat.com> <87wq033bje.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> In-Reply-To: <87wq033bje.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qapi: add dirty bitmap status List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Markus Armbruster Cc: Kevin Wolf , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 05/20/2015 04:20 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > John Snow writes: > >> On 05/12/2015 04:06 PM, Eric Blake wrote: >>> On 05/12/2015 01:53 PM, John Snow wrote: >>>> Bitmaps can be in a handful of different states with potentially >>>> more to come as we tool around with migration and persistence patches. >>>> >>>> Instead of having a bunch of boolean fields, it was suggested that we >>>> just have an enum status field that will help expose the reason to >>>> management APIs why certain bitmaps may be unavailable for various >>>> commands >>>> >>>> (e.g. busy in another operation, busy being migrated, etc.) >>> >>> Might be worth mentioning that this is an API change, but safe because >>> the old API is unreleased (and therefore, this patch MUST go in the 2.4 >>> time frame, if at all). >>> >>>> >>>> Suggested-by: Eric Blake >>>> Signed-off-by: John Snow >>>> --- >>>> block.c | 13 ++++++++++++- >>>> include/block/block.h | 1 + >>>> qapi/block-core.json | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++-- >>>> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>> >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake >>> >> >> I'm not actually sure whose tree this should go in. Markus's, perhaps? >> >> ("ping") > > I guess the case for "Block layer core" (Kevin) is at least as strong as > the case for "QAPI" (me). Kevin, what do you think? > His silence says "Markus, can you please do it? I discovered today that I don't care about this patch." --js