On 25/06/14 10:27 -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
On 06/19/2014 07:59 AM, Peter Krempa wrote:
Now that we are able to select images from the backing chain via indexed
access we should also convert possible network sources to
qemu-compatible strings before passing them to qemu.
Eventually, we'll want to use qemu's node-name functionality, also being
added (but possibly in qemu 2.2 instead of 2.1, depends on how Jeff's
series goes). But for the simpler case of all files being local or all
files being network from the same pool (that is, no mixed-mode chains),
then this does appear to work at getting a decent name into qemu, at
which point qemu can indeed commit to the right target.
---
src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
+
+ if (flags & VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_COMMIT_RELATIVE &&
+ topSource != disk->src) {
So you are silently ignoring the flag if topSource is the active layer?
That's okay, but reflect it in the documentation earlier in the series.
+ if (!virQEMUCapsGet(priv->qemuCaps, QEMU_CAPS_CHANGE_BACKING_FILE)) {
+ virReportError(VIR_ERR_CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED, "%s",
+ _("this qemu doesn't support relative blockpull"));
+ goto endjob;
+ }
+
+ if (virStorageFileGetRelativeBackingPath(topSource, baseSource,
+ &backingPath) < 0)
+ goto endjob;
+
+ if (!backingPath) {
+ virReportError(VIR_ERR_OPERATION_INVALID, "%s",
+ _("Can't keep relative backing relationship."));
No '.' at end of the message.
Wait - the earlier patches said that relative names would be preserved
if possible, implying that an absolute name would still be used if a
relative name was not possible. But this errors out if a relative name
was not possible. Which is nicer to the end user, treating the flag as
advisory or mandatory? I'm hoping Adam can answer which he'd prefer, as
one of the first clients of this new feature.
Thanks Eric. If the flag was specified we need it to fail if a
relative backing path is not possible. Otherwise the backing chain
could be rewritten such that the VM can not be started on a different
host in the future. For us, not honoring the flag is a corruption.
For those applications that don't mind (or might handle abs paths
differently than relative ones, they could retry the operation without
the flag. Perhaps we'll want a specific error code for this scenario
to make it easy to handle?
--
Adam Litke
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list