From: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
To: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>, qemu-block@nongnu.org
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] [PATCH v2 0/2] blockdev: Overlays are not snapshots
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 18:09:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e128b50e-88fb-b2bb-e773-b9c02db0cd28@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190603202236.1342-1-mreitz@redhat.com>
On 6/3/19 4:22 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
> QEMU’s always been confused over what a snapshot is: Is it the overlay?
> Is it the backing image?
>
> Confusion is rarely a good thing. I can’t think of any objective reason
> why the overlay would be a snapshot. A snapshot is something that does
> not change over time; the overlay does.
>
> (I suppose historically the reason is that “Taking an overlay” makes no
> sense, so the operations are called “Taking a snapshot”. Somehow, this
> meaning carried over to the new file that is created during that
> operation; if “Creating a snapshot” creates a file, that file must be
> the snapshot, right? Well, no, it isn’t.)
>
> Let’s fix this as best as we can. Better Nate than lever.
>
>
> v2:
> - Don’t break the iotests for a change
> (kept Eric’s R-b, because it felt like the right thing to do)
>
>
> git backport-diff against v1:
>
> Key:
> [----] : patches are identical
> [####] : number of functional differences between upstream/downstream patch
> [down] : patch is downstream-only
> The flags [FC] indicate (F)unctional and (C)ontextual differences, respectively
>
> 001/2:[----] [--] 'qapi/block-core: Overlays are not snapshots'
> 002/2:[0010] [FC] 'blockdev: Overlays are not snapshots'
>
>
> Max Reitz (2):
> qapi/block-core: Overlays are not snapshots
> blockdev: Overlays are not snapshots
>
> qapi/block-core.json | 20 ++++++++++----------
> blockdev.c | 10 +++++-----
> tests/qemu-iotests/085.out | 10 +++++-----
> 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
Makes good sense to me.
There are only 3,283 things named "snapshot" in QEMU so one less is
probably not the worst.
Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-03 22:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-03 20:22 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/2] blockdev: Overlays are not snapshots Max Reitz
2019-06-03 20:22 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] qapi/block-core: " Max Reitz
2019-06-05 5:43 ` Markus Armbruster
2019-06-03 20:22 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] blockdev: " Max Reitz
2019-06-03 22:09 ` John Snow [this message]
2019-06-04 8:40 ` [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] [PATCH v2 0/2] " Alberto Garcia
2019-06-13 19:41 ` [Qemu-devel] " Max Reitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e128b50e-88fb-b2bb-e773-b9c02db0cd28@redhat.com \
--to=jsnow@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).