On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 09:06:42AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > On 06/04/2014 08:09 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
> >
> >>> Sounds like we have an off-by-one condition if empty files behave
> >>> differently from other files. We ought to fix that bug (not that your
> >>> normal guest will ever have a 0-length backing file, but this was what I
> >>> was trying to use for libvirt's probing of whether active commit is
> >>> supported)
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes, agreed, this special case is only going to make management confused. I
> >> will send a patch to fix this.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >>
> >> Eric, is this a good way to probe the active commit? I was expecting full
> >> instrospection of QMP could do it, but I don't know about the status of
> >> that
> >> piece of work. Amos, any ideas?
> >
> > Introspection already missed qemu 2.0 when active commit was added; and
> > we're close enough to soft freeze for 2.1 that I'm guessing it will miss
> > 2.1 as well :(
>
> Almost certainly. It has non-trivial design issues. To have a chance
> to make it into 2.x, it needs to be posted for review early in the 2.x
> cycle.
I already started to respin the new version, let's see the new version
next week.
> [...]
--
Amos.
