Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/5] block/rbd: add all the currently supported runtime_opts

[Jeff Cody <jcody@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 04:18:57PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/27/2017 12:58 PM, Jeff Cody wrote:
> > This adds all the currently supported runtime opts, which
> > are the options as parsed from the filename.  All of these
> > options are explicitly checked for during during runtime,
> > with an exception to the "keyvalue-pairs" option.
> > 
> > This option contains all the key/value pairs that the QEMU rbd
> > driver merely unescapes, and passes along blindly to rados.
> 
> Maybe worth adding a comment that keyvalue-pairs will NOT be exposed in
> QAPI in the later patches, making it command-line only and
> non-introspectible.
>

Yes, I will do that.


> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Cody <jcody@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  block/rbd.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> >  1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> > 
> 
> > +static QemuOptsList runtime_opts = {
> > +    .name = "rbd",
> > +    .head = QTAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER(runtime_opts.head),
> > +    .desc = {
> > +        {
> > +            .name = "filename",
> > +            .type = QEMU_OPT_STRING,
> > +            .help = "Specification of the rbd image",
> > +        },
> > +        {
> > +            .name = "password-secret",
> > +            .type = QEMU_OPT_STRING,
> > +            .help = "ID of secret providing the password",
> > +        },
> > +        {
> > +            .name = "conf",
> 
> Is "conf" the best name, or do we want "configuration"?
> 

I chose "conf" because it matches the rados option name (and the command
line option name; it is of the form "conf=filename").

> > +            .type = QEMU_OPT_STRING,
> > +        },
> 
> Worth documenting all the options?
> 

Yes, probably so - and especially to map them up with what rados/ceph
options they correspond to.

> I'm not seeing where "keyvalue-pairs" is used yet, but assume it is in a
> later patch. But assuming the QAPI version in a later patch matches,
> other than keyvalue-pairs, I think you're okay.
> 

Yep, the next patch (where we switch over to .bdrv_parse_filename()).

> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
>

Thanks!

-Jeff