On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 13:49:17 +0100
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/27/2012 01:12 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > > If I didn't make any mistake in the code I'm just enforcing that when
> > > you specify "incremental" you also need a new image.
> > > There are still other valid cases where they are op
On 02/27/2012 01:12 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > If I didn't make any mistake in the code I'm just enforcing that when
> > you specify "incremental" you also need a new image.
> > There are still other valid cases where they are optional.
>
> Which operation will be performed if 'incremental' is
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 06:29:39 -0500 (EST)
Federico Simoncelli wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Luiz Capitulino"
> > To: "Federico Simoncelli"
> > Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mtosa...@redhat.com, pbonz...@redhat.com,
> > kw...@redhat.com, arm...@redhat.com
> > Sent: Friday, Februa
- Original Message -
> From: "Luiz Capitulino"
> To: "Federico Simoncelli"
> Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mtosa...@redhat.com, pbonz...@redhat.com,
> kw...@redhat.com, arm...@redhat.com
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 8:01:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] Add the blockdev-reopen and b
On 02/24/2012 11:30 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 12:01 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:49:04 +
>> Federico Simoncelli wrote:
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Federico Simoncelli
>>
>> How does this relate to migrate -b? Should it be deprecated?
>>
>> Btw, would be nice to h
On 02/24/2012 01:26 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 12:40:17 -0700
> Eric Blake wrote:
>
>> On 02/24/2012 12:01 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>>
+BlockDriver *drv;
+int i, j, escape;
+char new_filename[2048], *filename;
>>>
>>> I'd use PATH_MAX for new_fil
On 02/24/2012 12:01 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:49:04 +
> Federico Simoncelli wrote:
>
>> Signed-off-by: Federico Simoncelli
>
> How does this relate to migrate -b? Should it be deprecated?
>
> Btw, would be nice to have a 0/2 intro email describing the feature and
On 02/24/2012 09:36 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > > IMO, you could require the filename arguments to be escaped already.
> >
> > The monitor command was introduced exactly to avoid having to worry
> > about details such as escaping. JSON is already supposed to take care
> > of those.
>
> Then t
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 21:32:30 +0100
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 08:01 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > IMO, you could require the filename arguments to be escaped already.
>
> The monitor command was introduced exactly to avoid having to worry
> about details such as escaping. JSON is alr
On 02/24/2012 08:01 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> IMO, you could require the filename arguments to be escaped already.
The monitor command was introduced exactly to avoid having to worry
about details such as escaping. JSON is already supposed to take care
of those.
That said, I think Eric is rig
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 12:40:17 -0700
Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 12:01 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>
> >> +BlockDriver *drv;
> >> +int i, j, escape;
> >> +char new_filename[2048], *filename;
> >
> > I'd use PATH_MAX for new_filename's size.
>
> PATH_MAX need not be defined (and
On 02/24/2012 12:01 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>> +BlockDriver *drv;
>> +int i, j, escape;
>> +char new_filename[2048], *filename;
>
> I'd use PATH_MAX for new_filename's size.
PATH_MAX need not be defined (and on Hurd, it intentionally is not
defined); or might be so huge as to be u
On 02/24/2012 11:57 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 06:46 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
>> I think you need to be more explicit that @new-image-file MUST have
>> identical contents as the current image file, for this to be useful, and
>> that qemu does not validate whether the new image met those
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:49:04 +
Federico Simoncelli wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Federico Simoncelli
How does this relate to migrate -b? Should it be deprecated?
Btw, would be nice to have a 0/2 intro email describing the feature and
changelog
info.
> ---
> blockdev.c | 107
>
On 02/24/2012 06:46 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> I think you need to be more explicit that @new-image-file MUST have
> identical contents as the current image file, for this to be useful, and
> that qemu does not validate whether the new image met those conditions.
> Possible ways to achieve this:
Not
On 02/24/2012 09:49 AM, Federico Simoncelli wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Federico Simoncelli
Pretty sparse on the commit message.
> +++ b/hmp-commands.hx
> @@ -886,6 +886,44 @@ Snapshot device, using snapshot file as target if
> provided
> ETEXI
>
> {
> +.name = "drive_reopen",
Signed-off-by: Federico Simoncelli
---
blockdev.c | 107 --
hmp-commands.hx | 38 +++
hmp.c| 24
hmp.h|2 +
qapi-schema.json | 54 +++
5 files changed
17 matches
Mail list logo
