Am 24.02.2016 um 18:54 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
> On 23.02.2016 18:16, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Now that we can use drive_add to create new nodes without a BB, we also
> > want to be able to delete such nodes again.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > blockdev.c | 9 +++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/blockdev.c b/blockdev.c
> > index 3f46bc1..b76b6cd 100644
> > --- a/blockdev.c
> > +++ b/blockdev.c
> > @@ -2816,6 +2816,15 @@ void hmp_drive_del(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict)
> > AioContext *aio_context;
> > Error *local_err = NULL;
> >
> > + bs = bdrv_find_node(id);
> > + if (bs) {
> > + qmp_x_blockdev_del(false, NULL, true, id, &local_err);
> > + if (local_err) {
> > + error_report_err(local_err);
> > + }
> > + return;
> > + }
> > +
> > blk = blk_by_name(id);
> > if (!blk) {
> > error_report("Device '%s' not found", id);
> >
>
> It's a bit strange to require the user to specify the node name using
> "node-name" for drive_add, but the to use "id" in drive_del; especially
> because x-blockdev-del uses "node-name", too.Not sure I understand. For the user of drive_del that's simply a positional parameter, so they use neither "id" nor "node-name". Am I missing something? Kevin > Up to your discretion. > > Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mre...@redhat.com> >
pgpGKTSewcTW7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
