From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40361) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WhaT2-0006N8-Oo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 04:11:19 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WhaSu-0008Nt-Sj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 04:11:12 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:64703) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WhaSu-0008N1-LA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 04:11:04 -0400 Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 10:10:58 +0200 From: Stefan Hajnoczi Message-ID: <20140506081058.GA8923@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com> References: <1397155423-29713-1-git-send-email-mreitz@redhat.com> <5367B9FB.6060606@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5367B9FB.6060606@redhat.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 00/12] block/json: Add JSON protocol driver List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Max Reitz Cc: Kevin Wolf , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= Canet On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 06:19:07PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote: > On 10.04.2014 20:43, Max Reitz wrote: > >This series adds a passthrough JSON protocol block driver. Its filenam= es > >are JSON objects prefixed by "json:". The objects are used as options > >for opening another block device which will be the child of the JSON > >device. Regarding this child device, the JSON driver behaves nearly th= e > >same as raw_bsd in that it is just a passthrough driver. The only > >difference is probably that the JSON driver identifies itself as a blo= ck > >filter, in contrast to raw_bsd. > > > >The purpose of this driver is that it may sometimes be desirable to > >specify options for a block device where only a filename can be given, > >e.g., for backing files. Using this should obviously be the exception, > >but it is nice to have if actually needed. >=20 > Ping =E2=80=93 I do understand that Kevin has reservations against this > series, but as long as he doesn't explicitly ask me to reimplement > this in bdrv_open() without an own block driver (which I'd more or > less gladly do), I do not see issues why this series should not be > merged. I haven't reviewed it further because it seems like a kludge (that we have to keep supporting once it's merged). Was hoping you and Kevin will come up with a long-term fix instead. Kevin: Any new ideas on this patch series? Stefan