[adding Markus]
On 05/15/2017 04:48 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 05/12/2017 05:55 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>>>> @@ -1239,6 +1240,7 @@ void qmp_migrate(const char *uri, bool has_blk,
>>>>> bool blk,
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> if (has_inc && inc) {
>>>>> + migrate_set_block_enabled(s, true);
>>>>> migrate_set_block_shared(s, true);
>>>>
>>>> [2]
>>>>
>>>> IIUC for [1] & [2] we are solving the same problem that "shared"
>>>> depends on "enabled" bit. Would it be good to unitfy this dependency
>>>> somewhere? E.g., by changing migrate_set_block_shared() into:
>>>>
>>>> void migrate_set_block_shared(MigrationState *s, bool value)
>>>> {
>>>> s->enabled_capabilities[MIGRATION_CAPABILITY_BLOCK_SHARED] = value;
>>>> if (value) {
>>>> migrate_set_block_enabled(s, true);
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>
>>> ok with this.
>>
>> Or, as I commented on 1/3, maybe having a single property that is a
>> tri-state enum value, instead of 2 separate boolean properties, might be
>> nicer (but certainly a bit more complex to code up).
>
> If you teach me how to do the qapi/qmp part, I will do the other bits.
> I don't really care if we do it one way or the other.Adding Markus in, as I value his opinion on matters of UI design. -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
