qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 21/36] rbd: Pass BlockdevOptionsRbd to qemu_r


From: Kevin Wolf
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 21/36] rbd: Pass BlockdevOptionsRbd to qemu_rbd_connect()
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:09:21 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)

Am 23.02.2018 um 17:43 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
> On 2018-02-23 17:19, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Am 23.02.2018 um 00:25 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
> >> On 2018-02-21 14:53, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> >>> With the conversion to a QAPI options object, the function is now
> >>> prepared to be used in a .bdrv_co_create implementation.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <address@hidden>
> > 
> >>> -    *s_snap = g_strdup(snap);
> >>> -    *s_image_name = g_strdup(image_name);
> >>> +    *s_snap = g_strdup(opts->snapshot);
> >>> +    *s_image_name = g_strdup(opts->image);
> >>>  
> >>>      /* try default location when conf=NULL, but ignore failure */
> >>> -    r = rados_conf_read_file(*cluster, conf);
> >>> -    if (conf && r < 0) {
> >>> -        error_setg_errno(errp, -r, "error reading conf file %s", conf);
> >>> +    r = rados_conf_read_file(*cluster, opts->conf);
> >>> +    if (opts->has_conf && r < 0) {
> >>
> >> Reading opts->conf without knowing whether opts->has_conf is true is a
> >> bit weird.  Would you mind "s->has_conf ? opts->conf : NULL" for the
> >> rados_conf_read() call?
> >>
> >> On that thought, opts->snapshot and opts->user are optional, too.  Are
> >> they guaranteed to be NULL if they haven't been specified?  Should we
> >> guard those accesses with opts->has_* queries, too?
> > 
> > These days, both the QMP marshalling code (for the outermost struct when
> > called from x-blockdev-create) and the input visitor (for nested structs
> > and non-QMP callers) initialise the objects with {0} and g_malloc0().
> > 
> > I think Markus once told me that I shouldn't do pointless has_* checks
> > any more in QMP commands, so I intentionally did the same here.
> 
> I'm a bit cautious because of non-zero defaults (like sslverify in the
> ssh driver), but as long as you're aware...

I still hope that QAPI will allow specifying default values in the
schema sometime. But yes, for the time being, not checking has_*
obviously only works when the default is 0/false/NULL.

Kevin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]