Am 26.02.2021 um 20:17 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
> On 2/24/21 7:52 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > diff --git a/qapi/qom.json b/qapi/qom.json
> > index 449dca8ec5..2668ad8369 100644
> > --- a/qapi/qom.json
> > +++ b/qapi/qom.json
> > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
> > { 'include': 'authz.json' }
> > { 'include': 'block-core.json' }
> > { 'include': 'common.json' }
> > +{ 'include': 'crypto.json' }
> >
> > ##
> > # = QEMU Object Model (QOM)
> > @@ -449,6 +450,8 @@
> > 'rng-builtin',
> > 'rng-egd',
> > 'rng-random',
> > + 'secret',
> > + 'secret_keyring',
>
> What is stopping us from naming this 'secret-keyring'?
That it's not the name of the QOM type, so it wouldn't be possible to
create an object from it any more ('secret_keyring' would be rejected by
QAPI, but 'secret-keyring' would be rejected by QOM).
If we ever want to rename the type, this might be a case where QAPI
aliases could help. But I'm almost sure that there would be more
compatibility concerns than just with object creation for renaming a
user creatable QOM type.
Kevin
