Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsement...@yandex-team.ru> writes:
> On 18.07.24 14:01, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsement...@yandex-team.ru> writes:
>>
>>> That's a first step to move on newer job-* APIs.
>>>
>>> The difference between block-job-change and job-change is in
>>> find_block_job_locked() vs find_job_locked() functions. What's
>>> different?
>>>
>>> 1. find_block_job_locked() do check, is found job a block-job. This OK
>>
>> Do you mean something like find_block_job_locked() finds only block
>> jobs, whereas find_job_locked() finds any kind of job?
>
> Yes
Thanks!
>>> when moving to more generic API, no needs to document this change.
>>>
>>> 2. find_block_job_locked() reports DeviceNotActive on failure, when
>>> find_job_locked() reports GenericError. Still, for block-job-change
>>> errors are not documented at all, so be silent in deprecated.txt as
>>> well.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsement...@yandex-team.ru>
Suggest:
1. find_block_job_locked() finds only block jobs, whereas
find_job_locked() finds any kind of job. job-change is a
compatible extension of block-job-change.
2. find_block_job_locked() reports DeviceNotActive on failure, when
find_job_locked() reports GenericError. Since the kind of error
reported isn't documented for either command, and clients
shouldn't rely on undocumented error details, job-change is a
compatible replacement for block-job-change.
