Am 26.02.2021 um 20:17 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
On 2/24/21 7:52 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
diff --git a/qapi/qom.json b/qapi/qom.json index 449dca8ec5..2668ad8369 100644 --- a/qapi/qom.json +++ b/qapi/qom.json @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ { 'include': 'authz.json' } { 'include': 'block-core.json' } { 'include': 'common.json' } +{ 'include': 'crypto.json' }
## # = QEMU Object Model (QOM) @@ -449,6 +450,8 @@ 'rng-builtin', 'rng-egd', 'rng-random', + 'secret', + 'secret_keyring',
What is stopping us from naming this 'secret-keyring'?
That it's not the name of the QOM type, so it wouldn't be possible to create an object from it any more ('secret_keyring' would be rejected by QAPI, but 'secret-keyring' would be rejected by QOM). If we ever want to rename the type, this might be a case where QAPI aliases could help. But I'm almost sure that there would be more compatibility concerns than just with object creation for renaming a user creatable QOM type. Kevin