On a Friday in 2025, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 17:36:27 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:On a Thursday in 2025, Peter Krempa via Devel wrote: > From: Peter Krempa <pkre...@redhat.com> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkre...@redhat.com> > --- > NEWS.rst | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/NEWS.rst b/NEWS.rst > index 98ca838642..b2f3415001 100644 > --- a/NEWS.rst > +++ b/NEWS.rst > @@ -37,6 +37,16 @@ v11.2.0 (unreleased) > > * **Improvements** > > + * qemu: Improved guest agent corner case error reporting > + > + The APIs using the guest agent now report two specific error codes aimed at > + helping management applications and also users to differentiate between > + the guest agent timing out while libvirt is attempting synchronisation, thus > + no harm would be done and while being issued a command. > +guest-agent considered harmful? :)Well, it can be sub-optimal to the VM if the filesystems are frozen while the management layer thinks they are not. But I agree that "harm" is not the correct word here.Also, there's an extra 'and' How about? the guest agent timing out while libvirt is attempting synchronisation. These mean that the command was not executed so no change to the guest happened. Or just replace harm with change and and remove the extra and.So I wanted to outline the two cases: 1) timeout while syncing 2) timeout when an actual command was sent but we've timed out So how about: The APIs using the guest agent now report two specific error codes aimed at helping management applications/users to differentiate between timeout while libvirt was synchronizing with the guest agent and timeout after a command was already sent.
Reviewed-by: Ján Tomko <jto...@redhat.com> Jano
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
