Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] qapi/block-core: derpecate block-job-change
Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov(a)yandex-team.ru> writes:
On 18.07.24 14:01, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov(a)yandex-team.ru> writes:
>
>> That's a first step to move on newer job-* APIs.
>>
>> The difference between block-job-change and job-change is in
>> find_block_job_locked() vs find_job_locked() functions. What's
>> different?
>>
>> 1. find_block_job_locked() do check, is found job a block-job. This OK
>
> Do you mean something like find_block_job_locked() finds only block
> jobs, whereas find_job_locked() finds any kind of job?
Yes
Thanks!
>> when moving to more generic API, no needs to document
this change.
>>
>> 2. find_block_job_locked() reports DeviceNotActive on failure, when
>> find_job_locked() reports GenericError. Still, for block-job-change
>> errors are not documented at all, so be silent in deprecated.txt as
>> well.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov(a)yandex-team.ru>
Suggest:
1. find_block_job_locked() finds only block jobs, whereas
find_job_locked() finds any kind of job. job-change is a
compatible extension of block-job-change.
2. find_block_job_locked() reports DeviceNotActive on failure, when
find_job_locked() reports GenericError. Since the kind of error
reported isn't documented for either command, and clients
shouldn't rely on undocumented error details, job-change is a
compatible replacement for block-job-change.