On Tue, 07/09 10:05, Kevin Wolf wrote: > This removes duplicated definitions and documentation by reusing the > existing data type. > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> > --- > > To be applied on top of '[PATCH v3 0/3] qapi: Top-level type reference for > command definitions' > > qapi-schema.json | 32 ++------------------------------ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/qapi-schema.json b/qapi-schema.json > index a90aeb1..b251d28 100644 > --- a/qapi-schema.json > +++ b/qapi-schema.json > @@ -1791,42 +1791,14 @@ > # The operation can be stopped before it has completed using the > # block-job-cancel command. > # Are these lines, ... > -# @device: the name of the device which should be copied. > -# > -# @target: the target of the new image. If the file exists, or if it > -# is a device, the existing file/device will be used as the new > -# destination. If it does not exist, a new file will be created. > -# > -# @format: #optional the format of the new destination, default is to > -# probe if @mode is 'existing', else the format of the source > -# > -# @mode: #optional whether and how QEMU should create a new image, default is > -# 'absolute-paths'. > -# > -# @speed: #optional the maximum speed, in bytes per second > -# > -# @on-source-error: #optional the action to take on an error on the source, > -# default 'report'. 'stop' and 'enospc' can only be used > -# if the block device supports io-status (see BlockInfo). > -# > -# @on-target-error: #optional the action to take on an error on the target, > -# default 'report' (no limitations, since this applies to > -# a different block device than @device). > -# > -# Note that @on-source-error and @on-target-error only affect background I/O. > -# If an error occurs during a guest write request, the device's rerror/werror > -# actions will be used. > +# For the arguments, see the documentation of DriveBackup. > # > # Returns: nothing on success > # If @device is not a valid block device, DeviceNotFound > # > # Since 1.6 > ## and these still duplication of those comments for type declaration?
Thanks -- Fam
