On 09/01/2015 11:34 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 08/31/2015 06:55 PM, Wen Congyang wrote: > >>>> +This command is still a work in progress. It doesn't support all >>>> +block drivers. Stay away from it unless you want it to help with >>>> +its development. >>> >>> Maybe we should name it 'x-child-add' for now, so that we aren't baking >>> ourselves into a corner. >> >> Do you mean the command name should be x-child-add? It is OK. > > Use of the 'x-' prefix means a command is experimental and may change or > be withdrawn. It gives us a way to test if an interface is useful > without committing to that interface long term. We've still got time > before 2.5 to get blockdev-add working everywhere, in which case I think > we are better off using blockdev-add to create a new unattached BDS and > then have this command pass the node name to be made the new child, > rather than all the options for opening the child from scratch. >
Good idea. The unattached BDS created by the command blockdev-add always have BB. So it may be used by the device created by the command device_add later. So I think we should have an API to check it. What about the following patches? http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-07/msg01591.html http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-07/msg01590.html Thanks Wen Congyang
