Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] qapi: fix example of BLOCK_IMAGE_CORRUPTED event

[Markus Armbruster]

Victor Toso <victortoso@redhat.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 10:54:41AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Victor Toso <victortoso@redhat.com> writes:
>> 
>> > Fatal is not optional.
>> 
>> Recognizing that "Fatal" refers to member "fatal" takes mental
>> effort.  Always use identifiers verbatim, including case.
>> Where that makes for confusing prose, prefix with a @ like
>> @fatal, or rephrase, like "The
>> member fatal".
>
> That's true.
>
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Victor Toso <victortoso@redhat.com>
>> > ---
>> >  qapi/block-core.json | 7 +++----
>> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/qapi/block-core.json b/qapi/block-core.json
>> > index e89f2dfb5b..63c30a5378 100644
>> > --- a/qapi/block-core.json
>> > +++ b/qapi/block-core.json
>> > @@ -5006,10 +5006,9 @@
>> >  # Example:
>> >  #
>> >  # <- { "event": "BLOCK_IMAGE_CORRUPTED",
>> > -#      "data": { "device": "ide0-hd0", "node-name": "node0",
>> > -#                "msg": "Prevented active L1 table overwrite", "offset": 
>> > 196608,
>> > -#                "size": 65536 },
>> > -#      "timestamp": { "seconds": 1378126126, "microseconds": 966463 } }
>> > +#      "data": { "device": "", "node-name": "drive", "fatal": false,
>> > +#                "msg": "L2 table offset 0x2a2a2a00 unaligned (L1 index: 
>> > 0)" },
>> > +#      "timestamp": { "seconds": 1648243240, "microseconds": 906060 } }
>> >  #
>> >  # Since: 1.7
>> >  ##
>> 
>> Changing the value of @msg makes sense, but is worth a note in the
>> commit message.
>> 
>> Here's my try:
>> 
>>     qapi: fix example of BLOCK_IMAGE_CORRUPTED event
>> 
>>     Example output lacks mandatory member @fatal.  Provide it.
>> 
>>     Example output shows a value of @msg no version of the code
>>     produces.  No big deal, but replace it anyway by one that today's
>>     code does produce.
>> 
>> How do you like it?
>
> I agree. I'll be more careful in near future. Thanks for the
> suggestion. I've submit a v2.1 of this patch.

That's okay.  Asking me to replace the commit message in my tree is also
okay.

PATCH 3's commit message could use the same treatment.  Would you like
to go over all of them and respin?  Should be quick, no code changes.

Thanks!