Typo in subject: it's "deprecate".
Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy writes:
> On 18.07.24 14:01, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy writes:
>>
>>> That's a first step to move on newer job-* APIs.
>>>
>>> The difference between block-job-change and job-change is in
>>> find_block_job_locked() vs find_job_locked(
On 18.07.24 14:01, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy writes:
That's a first step to move on newer job-* APIs.
The difference between block-job-change and job-change is in
find_block_job_locked() vs find_job_locked() functions. What's
different?
1. find_block_job_locked()
Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy writes:
> That's a first step to move on newer job-* APIs.
>
> The difference between block-job-change and job-change is in
> find_block_job_locked() vs find_job_locked() functions. What's
> different?
>
> 1. find_block_job_locked() do check, is found job a block-job.
That's a first step to move on newer job-* APIs.
The difference between block-job-change and job-change is in
find_block_job_locked() vs find_job_locked() functions. What's
different?
1. find_block_job_locked() do check, is found job a block-job. This OK
when moving to more generic API, no nee
