| Message ID | 1456247799-9593-3-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 23.02.2016 18:16, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Now that we can use drive_add to create new nodes without a BB, we also > want to be able to delete such nodes again. > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> > --- > blockdev.c | 9 +++++++++ > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/blockdev.c b/blockdev.c > index 3f46bc1..b76b6cd 100644 > --- a/blockdev.c > +++ b/blockdev.c > @@ -2816,6 +2816,15 @@ void hmp_drive_del(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict) > AioContext *aio_context; > Error *local_err = NULL; > > + bs = bdrv_find_node(id); > + if (bs) { > + qmp_x_blockdev_del(false, NULL, true, id, &local_err); > + if (local_err) { > + error_report_err(local_err); > + } > + return; > + } > + > blk = blk_by_name(id); > if (!blk) { > error_report("Device '%s' not found", id); > It's a bit strange to require the user to specify the node name using "node-name" for drive_add, but the to use "id" in drive_del; especially because x-blockdev-del uses "node-name", too. Up to your discretion. Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Am 24.02.2016 um 18:54 hat Max Reitz geschrieben: > On 23.02.2016 18:16, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > Now that we can use drive_add to create new nodes without a BB, we also > > want to be able to delete such nodes again. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> > > --- > > blockdev.c | 9 +++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/blockdev.c b/blockdev.c > > index 3f46bc1..b76b6cd 100644 > > --- a/blockdev.c > > +++ b/blockdev.c > > @@ -2816,6 +2816,15 @@ void hmp_drive_del(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict) > > AioContext *aio_context; > > Error *local_err = NULL; > > > > + bs = bdrv_find_node(id); > > + if (bs) { > > + qmp_x_blockdev_del(false, NULL, true, id, &local_err); > > + if (local_err) { > > + error_report_err(local_err); > > + } > > + return; > > + } > > + > > blk = blk_by_name(id); > > if (!blk) { > > error_report("Device '%s' not found", id); > > > > It's a bit strange to require the user to specify the node name using > "node-name" for drive_add, but the to use "id" in drive_del; especially > because x-blockdev-del uses "node-name", too. Not sure I understand. For the user of drive_del that's simply a positional parameter, so they use neither "id" nor "node-name". Am I missing something? Kevin > Up to your discretion. > > Reviewed-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> >
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 18:54:45 +0100, Max Reitz wrote: > On 23.02.2016 18:16, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > Now that we can use drive_add to create new nodes without a BB, we also > > want to be able to delete such nodes again. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> > > --- > > blockdev.c | 9 +++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) [..] > > > > It's a bit strange to require the user to specify the node name using > "node-name" for drive_add, but the to use "id" in drive_del; especially > because x-blockdev-del uses "node-name", too. Well, since 'x-blockdev-del' is considered unstable yet I can't really use it in libvirt, thus we discussed using drive_del as a workaround. It makes partially sense since we'd add the new node with 'drive_add' in the first place. Peter
On 24.02.2016 19:23, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 24.02.2016 um 18:54 hat Max Reitz geschrieben: >> On 23.02.2016 18:16, Kevin Wolf wrote: >>> Now that we can use drive_add to create new nodes without a BB, we also >>> want to be able to delete such nodes again. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> blockdev.c | 9 +++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/blockdev.c b/blockdev.c >>> index 3f46bc1..b76b6cd 100644 >>> --- a/blockdev.c >>> +++ b/blockdev.c >>> @@ -2816,6 +2816,15 @@ void hmp_drive_del(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict) >>> AioContext *aio_context; >>> Error *local_err = NULL; >>> >>> + bs = bdrv_find_node(id); >>> + if (bs) { >>> + qmp_x_blockdev_del(false, NULL, true, id, &local_err); >>> + if (local_err) { >>> + error_report_err(local_err); >>> + } >>> + return; >>> + } >>> + >>> blk = blk_by_name(id); >>> if (!blk) { >>> error_report("Device '%s' not found", id); >>> >> >> It's a bit strange to require the user to specify the node name using >> "node-name" for drive_add, but the to use "id" in drive_del; especially >> because x-blockdev-del uses "node-name", too. > > Not sure I understand. For the user of drive_del that's simply a > positional parameter, so they use neither "id" nor "node-name". Am I > missing something? No, it's just me being confused again by the way HMP works. I keep forgetting that the user doesn't specify the parameter names. So the R-b stands. :-) Max
On 25.02.2016 13:51, Peter Krempa wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 18:54:45 +0100, Max Reitz wrote: >> On 23.02.2016 18:16, Kevin Wolf wrote: >>> Now that we can use drive_add to create new nodes without a BB, we also >>> want to be able to delete such nodes again. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> blockdev.c | 9 +++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > > [..] > >>> >> >> It's a bit strange to require the user to specify the node name using >> "node-name" for drive_add, but the to use "id" in drive_del; especially >> because x-blockdev-del uses "node-name", too. > > Well, since 'x-blockdev-del' is considered unstable yet I can't really > use it in libvirt, thus we discussed using drive_del as a workaround. > > It makes partially sense since we'd add the new node with 'drive_add' in > the first place. Yes, you're right. However, my question was solely about the parameter name (reusing "id" for a node name). As Kevin replied, for HMP the parameter name doesn't really matter to the user anyway, so reusing the "id" parameter here is completely fine. Max
diff --git a/blockdev.c b/blockdev.c index 3f46bc1..b76b6cd 100644 --- a/blockdev.c +++ b/blockdev.c @@ -2816,6 +2816,15 @@ void hmp_drive_del(Monitor *mon, const QDict *qdict) AioContext *aio_context; Error *local_err = NULL; + bs = bdrv_find_node(id); + if (bs) { + qmp_x_blockdev_del(false, NULL, true, id, &local_err); + if (local_err) { + error_report_err(local_err); + } + return; + } + blk = blk_by_name(id); if (!blk) { error_report("Device '%s' not found", id);
Now that we can use drive_add to create new nodes without a BB, we also want to be able to delete such nodes again. Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> --- blockdev.c | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)