From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55629) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fLuGd-0001sS-RB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 May 2018 13:43:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fLuGa-0003IY-GU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 May 2018 13:43:11 -0400 References: <20180518132114.4070-1-kwolf@redhat.com> <20180518132114.4070-22-kwolf@redhat.com> <26778cd3-3150-734b-d8c6-afa6e41f0215@redhat.com> <20180524082412.GC4008@localhost.localdomain> From: John Snow Message-ID: <1988292d-467a-9c63-e64d-035b0e93348a@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 13:42:57 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180524082412.GC4008@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 21/40] job: Convert block_job_cancel_async() to Job List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, jcody@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com, mreitz@redhat.com On 05/24/2018 04:24 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 24.05.2018 um 01:18 hat John Snow geschrieben: >>> diff --git a/include/qemu/job.h b/include/qemu/job.h >>> index 3e817beee9..2648c74281 100644 >>> --- a/include/qemu/job.h >>> +++ b/include/qemu/job.h >>> @@ -97,6 +97,12 @@ typedef struct Job { >>> */ >>> bool cancelled; >>> >>> + /** >>> + * Set to true if the job should abort immediately without waiting >>> + * for data to be in sync. >>> + */ >>> + bool force_cancel; >>> + >> >> Does this comment need an update now, though? >> >> Actually, in terms of "new jobs" API, it'd be really nice if cancel >> *always meant cancel*. >> >> I think "cancel" should never be used to mean "successful completion, >> but different from the one we'd get if we used job_complete." >> >> i.e., either we need a job setting: >> >> job-set completion-mode=[pivot|no-pivot] >> >> or optional parameters to pass to job-complete: >> >> job-complete mode=[understood-by-job-type] >> >> or some other mechanism that accomplishes the same type of behavior. It >> would be nice if it did not have to be determined at job creation time >> but instead could be determined later. > > I agree. We already made sure that job-cancel really means cancel on the > QAPI level, so we're free to do that. We just need to keep supporting > block-job-cancel with the old semantics, so what I have is the easy > conversion. We can change the internal implementation when we actually > implement the selection of a completion mode. > > Kevin > We need this before 3.0 though, yeah? unless we make job-cancel x-job-cancel or some other warning that the way it works might change, yeah? Or do I misunderstand our leeway to change this at a later point in time? (can job-cancel apply to block jobs created with the legacy infrastructure? My reading was "yes.") --js