[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-block] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] blockjob: expose manual-cull p
From: |
John Snow |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-block] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] blockjob: expose manual-cull property |
Date: |
Tue, 3 Oct 2017 21:32:11 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 |
On 10/03/2017 01:43 PM, Jeff Cody wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 11:59:28AM -0400, John Snow wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/03/2017 11:57 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> On 03/10/2017 05:15, John Snow wrote:
>>>> For drive-backup and blockdev-backup, expose the manual-cull
>>>> property, having it default to false. There are no universal
>>>> creation parameters, so it must be added to each job type that
>>>> it makes sense for individually.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: John Snow <address@hidden>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>
>>> The verb "cull" is a bit weird. The only alternative that comes to mind
>>> though are "reap" (like processes). There's also "join" (like threads),
>>> but would imply waiting if the jobs hasn't completed yet, and we
>>> probably don't want it.
>>>
>>> Paolo
>>>
>>
>> Sure, open to suggestions. I think Kevin suggested "delete" which I have
>> reservations about because of people potentially confusing it with
>> "cancel" or "complete" -- it does not have the capacity to
>> end/terminate/finish/complete/cancel a job.
>>
>> "reap" might be fine. I don't really have any strong preference.
>>
>
> As far as verbs go, I like both 'reap' and 'delete'. As far as the
> property, naming it 'manual_verb' is a bit odd, too. Maybe a clearer term
> for the property would just be 'persistent', with the QMP command being
> 'block_job_reap' or 'block_job_delete'?
>
> -Jeff
>
As they say, two hard problems in Computer Science ...
[Qemu-block] [PATCH 1/3] blockjob: add manual-cull property, John Snow, 2017/10/02
Re: [Qemu-block] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/3] blockjobs: add explicit job culling, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy, 2017/10/03