On 27.08.2013 10:58, Alex Jia wrote:
On 08/27/2013 04:47 PM, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On 08/27/13 09:53, Alex Jia wrote:
>> The flag "VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_COMMIT_DELETE" is missed by
>> qemuDomainBlockCommit(),
>> and then will hit error "unsupported flags (0x2) in function
>> qemuDomainBlockCommit" if users run 'virsh blockcommit' with
>> '--delete' option.
>>
>> RHBZ:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001475
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Jia<ajia(a)redhat.com>
>> ---
>> src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c b/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c
>> index ed29373..8863124 100644
>> --- a/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c
>> +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_driver.c
>> @@ -14444,7 +14444,8 @@ qemuDomainBlockCommit(virDomainPtr dom, const
>> char *path, const char *base,
>> const char *base_canon = NULL;
>> bool clean_access = false;
>>
>> - virCheckFlags(VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_COMMIT_SHALLOW, -1);
>> + virCheckFlags(VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_COMMIT_SHALLOW |
>> + VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_COMMIT_DELETE, -1);
>>
>> if (!(vm = qemuDomObjFromDomain(dom)))
>> goto cleanup;
>>
> The code doesn't seem to support the BLOCK_COMMIT_DELETE flag. It was
Yes, the codes haven't any implementation for BLOCK_COMMIT_DELETE flag
now, maybe, only need to raise a friendly error message in here instead
of "unsupported flags (0x2) xxxx".
I agree that this error message is not user-friendly. Bare virsh users
know nothing about our flags and their numerical expression. However, I
don't think there is a way how to produce "Unsupported flag
VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_COMMIT_DELETE" instead of "Unsupported flag 0x2" since
all we see in the qemuDomainBlockCommit() function is just number. I
mean, mapping of flag onto numeric value is not one-to-one function (aka
injective function). That is, a value 0x2 can express
VIR_DOMAIN_BLOCK_COMMIT_DELETE, VIR_DOMAIN_START_AUTODESTROY,
VIR_DUMP_DESTROY, etc. (git grep "1 << 1," include/).
If we want to make it work, we have to introduce an injective function,
e.g. virUnsupportedFlags(), which would accept a list (not an ORed
value) of all flags that are not supported. Too much effort for not much
outcome.
Michal