Am 21.05.2015 um 23:48 hat John Snow geschrieben:
>
>
> On 05/20/2015 04:20 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> > John Snow <js...@redhat.com> writes:
> >
> >> On 05/12/2015 04:06 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> >>> On 05/12/2015 01:53 PM, John Snow wrote:
> >>>> Bitmaps can be in a handful of different states with potentially
> >>>> more to come as we tool around with migration and persistence patches.
> >>>>
> >>>> Instead of having a bunch of boolean fields, it was suggested that we
> >>>> just have an enum status field that will help expose the reason to
> >>>> management APIs why certain bitmaps may be unavailable for various
> >>>> commands
> >>>>
> >>>> (e.g. busy in another operation, busy being migrated, etc.)
> >>>
> >>> Might be worth mentioning that this is an API change, but safe because
> >>> the old API is unreleased (and therefore, this patch MUST go in the 2.4
> >>> time frame, if at all).
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Suggested-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: John Snow <js...@redhat.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> block.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> >>>> include/block/block.h | 1 +
> >>>> qapi/block-core.json | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>>> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com>
> >>>
> >>
> >> I'm not actually sure whose tree this should go in. Markus's, perhaps?
> >>
> >> ("ping")
> >
> > I guess the case for "Block layer core" (Kevin) is at least as strong as
> > the case for "QAPI" (me). Kevin, what do you think?
I think bdrv_query_dirty_bitmaps() really belongs into block/qapi.c,
which is yours anyway. So it's either you as the QAPI maintainer or you
as the block submaintainer.
But if you think otherwise, I can consider it.
> His silence says "Markus, can you please do it? I discovered today that
> I don't care about this patch."
I'm sorry, John, but you didn't CC me, you didn't CC qemu-block, you
didn't CC anyone. I only had a chance to know about it since Wednesday
when Markus forwarded it, and I'm not sitting there waiting for new
patch emails because I'm bored. Rest assured, I have enough of them.
And then the forwarded email didn't even quote the patch any more, so I
couldn't just give a quick reply, but had to find the full email thread
in a different folder.
If you want to have patches applied quickly, make it easy for the
maintainers. You did the exact opposite, so you have no reason to
complain.
Kevin
