On 07/30/2012 10:32 AM, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 15:18:19 +0200 > [email protected] wrote: > >> From: Benoît Canet <[email protected]> >> >> Use the dedicated counting function in qmp_query_block in order to >> propagate the backing file depth to HMP. >> >> Signed-off-by: Benoit Canet <[email protected]>
>> +++ b/qapi-schema.json
>> @@ -398,6 +398,8 @@
>> #
>> # @backing_file: #optional the name of the backing file (for copy-on-write)
>> #
>> +# @backing_file_depth: number of files in the backing file chain (since:
>> 1.2)
>> +#
>> # @encrypted: true if the backing device is encrypted
>> #
>> # @bps: total throughput limit in bytes per second is specified
>> @@ -418,9 +420,10 @@
>> ##
>> { 'type': 'BlockDeviceInfo',
>> 'data': { 'file': 'str', 'ro': 'bool', 'drv': 'str',
>> - '*backing_file': 'str', 'encrypted': 'bool',
>> - 'bps': 'int', 'bps_rd': 'int', 'bps_wr': 'int',
>> - 'iops': 'int', 'iops_rd': 'int', 'iops_wr': 'int'} }
>> + '*backing_file': 'str', 'backing-file-depth': 'int',
>
> Should use underscores, ie. should be backing_file_depth.
Really? I thought we _want_ new interfaces to use '-', not '_', in QMP.
For 'backing_file', we are stuck due to back-compat (unless Anthony's
proposed patch to parse names case-insensitively with '-' and '_' folded
together is taken), but for the new field, we have no back-compat
constraints, and I would prefer backing-file-depth.
At any rate, you definitely need to make sure you agree between the docs
above and the JSON statement below (as written, you have both spellings
in the same patch).
--
Eric Blake [email protected] +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
