On 7/17/19 3:13 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 7/17/19 12:39 PM, John Snow wrote: >> From: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Let's add a possibility to query dirty-bitmaps not only on root nodes. >> It is useful when dealing both with snapshots and incremental backups. >> >> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> [Added deprecation information. --js] >> Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> block/qapi.c | 5 +++++ >> qapi/block-core.json | 6 +++++- >> qemu-deprecated.texi | 12 ++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> +++ b/qapi/block-core.json >> @@ -360,6 +360,9 @@ >> # @write_threshold: configured write threshold for the device. >> # 0 if disabled. (Since 2.3) >> # >> +# @dirty-bitmaps: dirty bitmaps information (only present if node >> +# has one or more dirty bitmaps) (Since 4.2) >> +# > > Naming-wise, everything else in this struct uses 'foo_bar' while your > addition uses 'foo-bar'. But at this point, I don't know if it's worth > uglifying this addition just to fit in. > >> # Since: 0.14.0 >> # >> ## >> @@ -378,7 +381,7 @@ >> '*bps_wr_max_length': 'int', '*iops_max_length': 'int', >> '*iops_rd_max_length': 'int', '*iops_wr_max_length': 'int', >> '*iops_size': 'int', '*group': 'str', 'cache': 'BlockdevCacheInfo', >> - 'write_threshold': 'int' } } >> + 'write_threshold': 'int', '*dirty-bitmaps': ['BlockDirtyInfo'] } } >> >> ## >> # @BlockDeviceIoStatus: >> @@ -656,6 +659,7 @@ >> # >> # @dirty-bitmaps: dirty bitmaps information (only present if the >> # driver has one or more dirty bitmaps) (Since 2.0) >> +# Deprecated in 4.2; see BlockDirtyInfo instead. > > s/BlockDirtyInfo/BlockDeviceInfo/ > > With the spelling fix, > Sigh, oops. > Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Is this worth squeezing into 4.1, to start the deprecation clock one > cycle earlier (on the grounds that the missing information for anonymous > nodes is a bug)? Or am I pushing the boundaries too far, where keeping > this as 4.2 material remains the best course of action? > Appealing option. If you think the deprecation plan is actionable enough for libvirt, I'm in favor. --js -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
