On Fri, 10/31 10:01, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 11.09.2014 um 07:05 hat Fam Zheng geschrieben: > > Similar to drive-backup, but this command uses a device id as target > > instead of creating/opening an image file. > > > > Also add blocker on target bs, since the target is also a named device > > now. > > > > Add check and report error for bs == target which became possible but is > > an illegal case with introduction of blockdev-backup. > > > > Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng <f...@redhat.com> > > > diff --git a/qapi/block-core.json b/qapi/block-core.json > > index a685d02..b953c7b 100644 > > --- a/qapi/block-core.json > > +++ b/qapi/block-core.json > > @@ -669,6 +669,40 @@ > > '*on-target-error': 'BlockdevOnError' } } > > > > ## > > +# @BlockdevBackup > > +# > > +# @device: the name of the device which should be copied. > > +# > > +# @target: the name of the backup target device. > > Both of these are either a BlockBackend ID or a BDS node-name, right? Do > we have a standard way of expressing this? "name of the device" isn't > quite clear.
"name of the device" is used everywhere to document the "device" parameters in our json schema. Since we have BlockBackend now, device-name and node-name could be better distinguished. All we have to do is giving a beautiful name to both. [This patch is only a copy&paste and is consistent with the rest part of the file. So I'll leave it for now :] Fam
