From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34289) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZCT7a-0000Cv-Ju for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 09:41:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZCT7V-0004qV-4t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 09:41:14 -0400 Received: from mx-v6.kamp.de ([2a02:248:0:51::16]:44465 helo=mx01.kamp.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZCT7U-0004pK-Qe for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 09:41:09 -0400 Message-ID: <559BD6EE.9040407@kamp.de> Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2015 15:41:02 +0200 From: Peter Lieven MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1436270904-2855-1-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com> <1436270904-2855-4-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL for-2.4 3/7] block/nfs: add support for setting debug level List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Hajnoczi , Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: Kevin Wolf , Peter Maydell , qemu-devel Am 07.07.2015 um 15:24 schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi: > On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: >> From: Peter Lieven >> >> upcoming libnfs versions will support logging debug messages. Add >> support for it in qemu through a per-drive option. >> >> Examples: >> qemu -drive if=virtio,file=nfs://...,file.debug=2 >> qemu-img create -o debug=2 nfs://... 10G >> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Lieven >> Reviewed-by: Fam Zheng >> Message-id: 1436251847-16875-1-git-send-email-pl@kamp.de >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi >> --- >> block/nfs.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---- >> qapi/block-core.json | 20 ++++++++++++++++---- >> 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > Kevin has pointed out at the QAPI portion of this patch isn't ready > for prime time yet, so I will revert the patch and resend the pull > request. Yes please, I was not aware that adding the QAPI part has such an impact. I would appreciate if someone who has more experience with the QAPI stuff would look at this and make a proposal how to handle the NFS (and also the iSCSI) case. I'm happy to look at the implementation then. Peter