Yong Huang <yong.huang@smartx.com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 2:31 PM Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> yong.huang@smartx.com writes:
>>
>> > From: Hyman Huang <yong.huang@smartx.com>
>> >
>> > To support detached LUKS header creation, make the existing 'file'
>> > field in BlockdevCreateOptionsLUKS optional.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Hyman Huang <yong.huang@smartx.com>
>> > Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > diff --git a/qapi/block-core.json b/qapi/block-core.json
>> > index ae604c6019..69a88d613d 100644
>> > --- a/qapi/block-core.json
>> > +++ b/qapi/block-core.json
>> > @@ -4957,7 +4957,8 @@
>> > #
>> > # Driver specific image creation options for LUKS.
>> > #
>> > -# @file: Node to create the image format on
>> > +# @file: Node to create the image format on, mandatory except when
>> > +# 'preallocation' is not requested
>>
>> You mean when @preallocation is "off"?
>>
>> Cases:
>>
>> 1. @file is mandatory
>>
>
> When @preallocation is specified to PREALLOC_MODE_ON, file
> is mandatory because preallocation aims to act on payload data that
> @file holds.
>
>
>> 2. @file is optional and present
>>
>
> When @preallocation is not specified or equals to PREALLOC_MODE_OFF,
> @file if optional.
> If @file present，there are two cases:
> 1. @header is absent, the creation process degenerate to the origin action.
> 2. @header is present, the creation process would trunk the payload data
> image that @file holds and do the LUKS formatting on the image that
> @header refers;
>
>
>>
>> 3. @file is optional and absent
>>
>
> When @preallocation is not specified or equals to PREALLOC_MODE_OFF,
> @file if optional.
> If @file is absent, do the LUKS formatting only.
> Note that Either the parameter 'header' or 'file' must be specified.
>
> Here's my interpretation; do let me know if any of the points are off or
> need to be refactored.
>
>
>>
>> Ignorant question: behavior in each case?
Thanks! Would it make sense to work the above into the documentation?
You mean adding the above interpretation to the following patch?
[...]