On 12/22/2011 11:07 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 05:25:49PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 12/22/2011 03:20 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
Usage: <filesystem type='mount' accessmode='passthrough' writeout='immediate'> <source dir='/export/to/guest'/> <target dir='mount_tag'/> </filesystem> I still don't like the proposed XML. We need to get consensus on where to put it, with my proposal being:
<filesystem type='mount'> <driver type='path' write='immediate'/> <source dir='/export/to/guest'/> <target dir='mount_tag'/> </filesystem> Right, other types of drivers might include a userspace NFS client, or some kind of "artificial" filesystem.
In addition, instead of write='immediate' I suggest cache='writeback'/cache='writethrough'. Yeah I agree - we should follow the syntax we already use for caching with the<disk> element instead of inventing new syntax
Daniel Hi Dan and Paolo, There had been a discussion earlier on the qemu-devel mailing list on whether cache=writethrough is appropriate for 9pfs Vs writeout as the attribute name, and it was decided to use writeout as the writeout behaviour is not exactly what cache=writethrough means. Ccing Aneesh here who was part of the original qemu-devel discussion.
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-10/msg01274.html Aneesh, 2 things being discussed here from 9pfs perspective 1) Whether writeout should be an attribute at the <filesystem...> level or <driver..> level in the XML schema. 2) Have cache=writethrough in the XML instead of writeout=immediate. Comments pls.