qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] rbd: reload ceph config for block device


From: Vaibhav Bhembre
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] rbd: reload ceph config for block device
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 19:14:36 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)

Thanks for mentioning that! I changed my mail client which should get
rid of the ugliness hopefully. Let me know if you see anything otherwise
now.

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 03:19:38PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 07/14/2016 02:53 PM, Vaibhav Bhembre wrote:
> > Thanks Eric!
> 
> meta-comment - your mailer's default quoting behavior makes it very hard
> to read your replies.  Observe:
> 
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Eric Blake <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 07/14/2016 01:32 PM, Vaibhav Bhembre wrote:
> >>> This patch adds ability to reload ceph configuration for an attached RBD
> >>> block device. This is necessary for the cases where rebooting a VM and/or
> >>> detaching-reattaching a RBD drive is not an easy option.
> >>
> >> Probably worth including address@hidden if you resend this. I've
> >> added them in cc now, per the output of:
> >>  scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f block/rbd
> >>
> >>>
> >>> The reload mechanism relies on the bdrv_reopen_* calls to provide a
> >> transactional
> >>> guarantee (using 2PC) for pulling in new configuration parameters. In
> >> the _prepare
> 
> Your mailer wrapped your lines but used inconsistent prefix when doing
> so, which makes attribution of the lines difficult (some start with
> '>>>', which traces to you, some start with '>>' which traces to me) (of
> course, this is after my mailer has added yet another round of >
> prefixing, but at least I know my mailer [Thunderbird] has sane quoting
> behavior for the most part).
> 
> ...
> >>> +# Since: 2.7
> >>
> >> v1 was posted June 17, before soft freeze on June 28, so this may still
> >> make hard freeze if someone picks it up before hard freeze on July 19.
> >> But we're getting close.
> >>
> >> ​Hoping so! ​
> > 
> 
> Here, both my text ("But we're getting close") and your text ("Hoping
> so!") are prefixed with the same '>>' prefix, which makes it sound like
> I wrote your reply.
> 
> 
> >> We may want to rebase this on top of Kevin's series that adds
> >> qmp_get_root_bs()
> >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-07/msg03086.html
> >>
> >> ​This is exactly what I need. Should I wait for other reviews before
> > making this change or should I push it right-away?
> 
> and here, half your paragraph is attributed to me (prefix of '>>') while
> only the second half is attributed to you (prefix of '>').
> 
> -- 
> Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
> Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
> 






reply via email to

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