From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33271)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1SfZpJ-0002Sj-Vv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:56:51 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1SfZpI-0005oh-4W
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:56:49 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40485)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1SfZpH-0005oL-Su
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:56:48 -0400
Message-ID: <4FDB6949.80506@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 18:56:41 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1339772759-31004-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<1339772759-31004-3-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<4FDB680A.5060200@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FDB680A.5060200@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 02/36] qerror/block: introduce
	QERR_BLOCK_JOB_NOT_ACTIVE
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com

Il 15/06/2012 18:51, Eric Blake ha scritto:
> Looks reasonable, but it will affect libvirt:  Right now, libvirt parses
> the particular return code (qemu_monitor.c:qemuMonitorJSONBlockJob), and
> translates
> 
> DeviceNotActive => "No active operation on device"
> ...
> all others => "Unexpected error"
> 
> so if this patch goes in but libvirt doesn't match, then libvirt will
> have a regression in error message quality.  Not the end of the world,
> though, so don't hold back just because of libvirt.
> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
> 
>> > @@ -1679,8 +1679,7 @@
>> >  # @device: the device name
>> >  #
>> >  # Returns: Nothing on success
>> > -#          If no background operation is active on this device, DeviceNotActive
>> > -#          If cancellation already in progress, DeviceInUse
>> > +#          If no background operation is active on this device, BlockJobNotActive
> What happened to DeviceInUse?

It wasn't being sent in reality. :)

Paolo