Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-12-04 Thread Alberto Garcia
On Wed 02 Dec 2020 06:51:21 PM CET, Kevin Wolf wrote: >> I had tried this already and it does work when inserting the filter (we >> know that 'hd0-file' is about to be detached from the parent so we can >> put it in the list) but I don't think it's so easy if we want to remove >> the filter, i.e. >

Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-12-02 Thread Kevin Wolf
Am 02.12.2020 um 17:40 hat Alberto Garcia geschrieben: > On Wed 02 Dec 2020 05:28:08 PM CET, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > >> So x-blockdev-reopen sees that we want to replace the current > >> bs->file ("hd0-file") with a new one ("throttle0"). The problem here > >> is that throttle0 has hd0-file as its c

Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-12-02 Thread Alberto Garcia
On Wed 02 Dec 2020 05:28:08 PM CET, Kevin Wolf wrote: >> So x-blockdev-reopen sees that we want to replace the current >> bs->file ("hd0-file") with a new one ("throttle0"). The problem here >> is that throttle0 has hd0-file as its child, so when we check the >> permissions on throttle0 (and its c

Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-12-02 Thread Kevin Wolf
Am 02.12.2020 um 17:12 hat Alberto Garcia geschrieben: > On Tue 20 Oct 2020 10:23:33 AM CEST, Kevin Wolf wrote: > >> I forgot to add, we still don't support changing bs->file with this > >> command, so I guess that would be one blocker? > >> > >> There's no other way of inserting filter nodes, or

Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-12-02 Thread Alberto Garcia
On Tue 20 Oct 2020 10:23:33 AM CEST, Kevin Wolf wrote: >> I forgot to add, we still don't support changing bs->file with this >> command, so I guess that would be one blocker? >> >> There's no other way of inserting filter nodes, or is there? > > Not that I'm aware of. > > So yes, changing bs->fil

Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-10-21 Thread Kevin Wolf
Am 20.10.2020 um 13:53 hat Alberto Garcia geschrieben: > On Tue 20 Oct 2020 10:23:33 AM CEST, Kevin Wolf wrote: > >> >https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2020-02/msg00601.html > >> > >> I forgot to add, we still don't support changing bs->file with this > >> command, so I guess that

Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-10-20 Thread Alberto Garcia
On Tue 20 Oct 2020 10:23:33 AM CEST, Kevin Wolf wrote: >> >https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2020-02/msg00601.html >> >> I forgot to add, we still don't support changing bs->file with this >> command, so I guess that would be one blocker? >> >> There's no other way of inserting fi

Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-10-20 Thread Kevin Wolf
Am 19.10.2020 um 18:46 hat Alberto Garcia geschrieben: > On Mon 19 Oct 2020 05:56:56 PM CEST, Alberto Garcia wrote: > > And this one in particular: > > > >https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2020-02/msg00601.html > > I forgot to add, we still don't support changing bs->file with this

Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-10-20 Thread Kashyap Chamarthy
On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 05:56:56PM +0200, Alberto Garcia wrote: > On Tue 06 Oct 2020 11:10:01 AM CEST, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote: > > Hi, folks > > > > If this was already discussed on the list, please point me to the > > thread. I took a quick look at my local archives, I didn't find any, > > besid

Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-10-19 Thread Alberto Garcia
On Mon 19 Oct 2020 05:56:56 PM CEST, Alberto Garcia wrote: > And this one in particular: > >https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2020-02/msg00601.html I forgot to add, we still don't support changing bs->file with this command, so I guess that would be one blocker? There's no other w

Re: Plans to bring QMP 'x-blockdev-reopen' out of experimental?

2020-10-19 Thread Alberto Garcia
On Tue 06 Oct 2020 11:10:01 AM CEST, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote: > Hi, folks > > If this was already discussed on the list, please point me to the > thread. I took a quick look at my local archives, I didn't find any, > besides patches to tests. I think this is the last time that I was discussed: