Re: [PATCH 8/8] NEWS: Mention guest agent error code improvements

On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 17:36:27 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote: > On a Thursday in 2025, Peter Krempa via Devel wrote: > > From: Peter Krempa <pkrempa(a)redhat.com&gt; > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa(a)redhat.com&gt; > > --- > > NEWS.rst | 10 ++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/NEWS.rst b/NEWS.rst > > index 98ca838642..b2f3415001 100644 > > --- a/NEWS.rst > > +++ b/NEWS.rst > > @@ -37,6 +37,16 @@ v11.2.0 (unreleased) > > > > * **Improvements** > > > > + * qemu: Improved guest agent corner case error reporting > > + > > + The APIs using the guest agent now report two specific error codes aimed at > > + helping management applications and also users to differentiate between > > + the guest agent timing out while libvirt is attempting synchronisation, thus > > + no harm would be done and while being issued a command. > > + > > guest-agent considered harmful? :) Well, it can be sub-optimal to the VM if the filesystems are frozen while the management layer thinks they are not. But I agree that "harm" is not the correct word here. > > Also, there's an extra 'and' > > How about? > > the guest agent timing out while libvirt is attempting synchronisation. These > mean that the command was not executed so no change to the guest > happened. > > Or just replace harm with change and and remove the extra and. So I wanted to outline the two cases: 1) timeout while syncing 2) timeout when an actual command was sent but we've timed out So how about: The APIs using the guest agent now report two specific error codes aimed at helping management applications/users to differentiate between timeout while libvirt was synchronizing with the guest agent and timeout after a command was already sent.